Crandell

The trial court imposed on defendant a restitution fine of $2,600 that had not been mentioned by the prosecutor when he recited the parties’ plea agreement. Defendant contends imposition of the fine violated his plea bargain and he therefore is entitled, pursuant to People v. Walker (1991) 54 Cal.3d 1013 [ 1 Cal.Rptr.2d 902 , 819 P.2d 861 ] (Walker), to have the fine reduced to the statutory minimum of $200. (See Pen. Code, § 1202.4, subd. (b)(1); Walker , at p. 1029.) We conclude the error that occurred in Walker did not occur here. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeal.

Background

In November 2002, defendant, armed with a .45-caliber handgun, entered an apartment and ordered its two occupants not to move. Two accomplices also entered. Defendant brandished his gun and demanded the victims’ wallets; after obtaining them, he bound the victims’ wrists and ankles with tape. Defendant and his accomplices then left, taking some electronic components and marijuana plants with them. A short time later, police apprehended the three, and the victims identified them as the perpetrators.

The Santa Clara County District Attorney filed a complaint charging…

The majority correctly holds that the imposition of a $2,600 restitution fine did not violate the plea bargain, because the record makes clear the parties negotiated no term contrary to the court’s action. Asked to “state the offered disposition,” the prosecutor described it *1311 clearly: Defendant would plead to a single count of robbery with use of a firearm, and would receive a sentence of 13 years, significantly below the legal maximum term he could otherwise suffer on this charge and enhancement. In turn, the People would dismiss a second robbery count, together with its related firearm enhancement.

The prosecutor mentioned no other terms. Neither defendant nor his counsel spoke up to say the prosecutor had omitted provisions or otherwise incompletely stated the agreement.

Then, before taking the plea, the court warned defendant he would “have to pay” a restitution fine between $200 and $10,000. Defendant acknowledged he understood. Neither he nor either counsel protested that the parties had agreed there would be only a minimum fine. Under such circumstances, we may readily infer the parties had made no bargain precluding the court from exercising its discretion as to the…

The trial court imposed on defendant a restitution fine of $2,600 that had not been mentioned by the prosecutor when he recited the parties' plea agreement. Defendant contends imposition of the fine violated his plea bargain and he therefore is entitled, pursuant to People v. Walker (1991) 54 Cal.3d 1013 , 1 Cal.Rptr.2d 902 , 819 P.2d 861 ( Walker ), to have the fine reduced to the statutory minimum of $200. (See Pen.Code, § 1202.4, subd. (b)(1); Walker, at p. 1029, 1 Cal.Rptr.2d 902 , 819 P.2d 861 .) We conclude the error that occurred in Walker did not occur here. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeal.

In November 2002, defendant, armed with a .45-caliber handgun, entered an apartment and ordered its two occupants not to move. Two accomplices also entered. Defendant brandished his gun and demanded the victims' wallets; after obtaining them, he bound the victims' wrists and ankles with tape. Defendant and his accomplices then left, taking some electronic components and marijuana plants with them. A short time later, police apprehended the three, and the victims identified them as the perpetrators.

The Santa Clara County District Attorney filed…