P. v. Cal


Filed 6/1/11 P. v. Cal CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED



California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.


IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(Butte)
----

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JEMAURY DEANDRE CAL, Defendant and Appellant.

C065847 (Super. Ct. Nos. CM030856, CM032589, CM032649)

In case No. CM032589, defendant Jemaury Deandre Cal pleaded no contest to first degree burglary (Pen. Code, § 459; further statutory references are to this code), with an enhancement for committing the offenses while someone was present in the residence (§ 667.5, subd. (c)(21)). In case No. CM032649, defendant pleaded no contest to receiving stolen property. (§ 496, subd. (a).) In addition, defendant was found to be in violation of his probation in case No. CM030856, a misdemeanor theft offense. Probation was denied and defendant was sentenced to serve a term in state prison of four years eight months. Defendant was ordered to pay various fines and fees, including a $10 fine plus assessment penalties pursuant to section 1202.5.
Defendant appeals, claiming the trial court erred by imposing a fine under section 1202.5 without determining whether he had the ability to pay it. As defendant did not object at the time the fine was imposed, we conclude the issue has been forfeited.
DISCUSSION[1]
Defendant complains that the trial court erroneously imposed a fine pursuant to section 1202.5 without determining his ability to pay, as required by the statute. (§ 1202.5, subd. (a).) We conclude that defendant's failure to object to the imposition of the fine in the trial court precludes him from raising this argument on appeal.
The probation report in defendant's matter contained a recommendation that he be ordered to pay a â€