P. v.
Magana

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Filed 9/3/13 
P. v. Magana 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NOT TO
BE PUBLISHED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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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

(Yuba)

----

 

 
>

THE PEOPLE,                           Plaintiff and Respondent,               v.   CHRISTIAN CARRILLO MAGANA,                           Defendant and Appellant.

C071066   (Super. Ct. No. CRF11559)

            Defendant Christian Carrillo Magana
pled no contest to rape by force.  (Pen. Code,href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1" title="">[1] § 261, subd. (a)(2).)  In exchange, four related counts and
enhancements were dismissed.  Defendant
was sentenced to state prison for a
stipulated upper term of eight years, awarded 164 days of custody credit and 24
days of conduct credit (§ 2933.1), and ordered to pay fines and fees
including a sex crime fine (§ 290.3) in the amount of $1,140 including
unspecified penalty assessments. 

            Defendant timely filed a notice of
appeal but did not seek a certificate of
probable cause.  Thereafter,
defendant filed two more notices of appeal, each seeking a certificate of
probable cause.  One request was granted
and the other denied.  The issues raised
in this appeal do not require a certificate of probable cause.

            Defendant contends (1) he is
entitled to one additional day of custody credit and (2) the abstract of
judgment must be amended to itemize the components of the $1,140 sex crime fine
and penalty assessments.  The People
concede both contentions.  We agree.  Accordingly, we modify the judgment to add
one day of custody credit and remand the case to the trial court to determine
the sex crime fine and penalty assessments that constitute the aggregate $1,140
amount and amend the abstract of judgment to list, with the statutory basis,
the fines and fees.

FACTS

            The facts of defendant’s offense are
not at issue and need not be set forth in this opinion.

DISCUSSION

>I

>Custody Credit

            Defendant contends, and the People
concede, the judgment must be modified to award him 165 days of custody
credit.  We accept the People’s
concession.

            Defendant was in custody from his
arrest on October 17, 2011, through his sentencing
on March 29, 2012, a period of 165 days.href="#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2" title="">[2]  Accordingly, we modify the judgment to award
him 165 days of custody credit. 

>II

>Sex Crime Fine and
Penalty Assessments

            Defendant contends, and the People
concede, the abstract of judgment must be amended to itemize the components of
the $1,140 sex crime fine and penalty assessments.  We accept the People’s concession.

            Section 290.3,
subdivision (a),
authorizes a base sex crime fine in the amount of “three hundred dollars ($300)
upon the first conviction or a fine of five hundred dollars ($500) upon the
second and each subsequent conviction, unless the court determines that the
defendant does not have the ability to pay the fine.”  In this case, the trial court did not specify
the amount of the base fine or identify the penalty assessments that resulted
in the aggregate $1,140 fine.  Further,
the probation report only refers to a $1,140 fine pursuant to section 290.3.

            “Although we recognize that a
detailed recitation of all the fees, fines and penalties on the record may be
tedious, California law does not authorize
shortcuts.  All fines and fees must be
set forth in the abstract of judgment.” 
(People v. High (2004)
119 Cal.App.4th 1192, 1200.)  On
remand, the trial court shall determine the sex crime fine and penalty
assessments that constitute the aggregate $1,140 amount and amend the abstract
of judgment to “separately list, with the statutory basis, all fines, fees and
penalties imposed.”  (>Id. at p. 1201.)

DISPOSITION

            The judgment is modified to award
defendant 165 days of custody credit.  As
so modified, the judgment is affirmed. 
The trial court is directed to determine the sex crime fine and penalty
assessments and prepare an amended abstract of judgment that separately lists,
with the statutory basis, all fines, fees, and penalties imposed upon
defendant.

 

 

                                                                                           HOCH               , J.

 

 

We concur:

 

 

              RAYE               , P. J.

 

 

            MURRAY          , J.