P. v. Young



















Filed 1/29/13 P. v. Young CA4/3























NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS





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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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



FOURTH APPELLATE
DISTRICT



DIVISION THREE




>

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DAVID LAVAR YOUNG, Defendant and Appellant.

G046395 (Super. Ct. No. 11NF3009) ORDER MODIFYING OPINION AND DENYING PETITION FOR REHEARING; CHANGE IN JUDGMENT

It is ordered that the
opinion filed on January 3, 2013,
be modified in the following
particulars:

1. On page 16, delete Section II titled “Section
3000, subdivision (b)(1)” and the last two paragraphs of the opinion, the first
of which begins with “Young asserts the trial court erred . . . .” On page 17 delete the “DISPOSITION” and the
sentence, “We affirm the judgment.”
Replace with the following:

“>II.
Section 3000, subdivision (b)(1)

Young asserts the trial
court erred when it imposed a $1,000 fine pursuant to section 3000, subdivision
(b)(1). In its respondent’s brief, the
Attorney General did not respond. At
oral argument, the Attorney General conceded the issue. We agree the $1,000 parole revocation
restitution fine imposed pursuant to section 3000,

subdivision
(b)(1), should be stricken.

A determinate prison
term pursuant to section 1170 must include a period of parole. (§ 3000, subd. (a)(1).) When a person’s sentence includes a period of
parole, a trial court must impose a parole revocation restitution fine in the
same amount as the restitution fine. (§
1202.45; People v. Brasure (2008) 42
Cal.4th 1037, 1075.)

The trial court
sentenced Young to double the middle term of two years on count 3. This is a determinate prison term under
section 1170, and thus, Young’s sentence should include a parole revocation
fine. The trial court imposed the mandatory
section 1202.4 restitution fine in the amount of $240. The court then stated: “The court will impose and stay an identical
fine. That stay will be permanent upon
successful competition of parole.” The
court, however, also imposed a $1,000 fine plus penalty assessment pursuant to
section 3000, subdivision (b)(1).

The trial court erred in
imposing a $1,000 fine pursuant to section 3000, subdivision (b)(1), because
the parole revocation restitution fine must be identical to the restitution
fine imposed pursuant to section 1202.4.
We order the $1,000 fine imposed pursuant to section 3000, subdivision
(b)(1), stricken.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is modified
to strike the $1,000 parole revocation restitution fine imposed pursuant to
section 3000, subdivision (b)(1). We
direct the clerk of the superior court to prepare an amended abstract of
judgment and transmit a certified copy



of
the amended abstract of judgment to the Department of Corrections, Division of
Adult Operations. We affirm the judgment
as modified.”







O’LEARY,
P. J.



WE CONCUR:







BEDSWORTH, J.







ARONSON, J.