People v. Taylor CA3

DISCUSSION

“A restitution fine qualifies as punishment for purposes of the prohibition against ex post facto laws.” (People v. Saelee (1995) 35 Cal.App.4th 27, 30.) Thus, the applicable minimum amount of a restitution fine to be assessed is calculated as of the date of the offense. (People v. Valenzuela (2009) 172 Cal.App.4th 1246, 1248.) Here, the minimum statutory restitution fine in effect at the time defendant committed the robbery in 2012 was $240 (not $280, which was the minimum in effect at the time defendant was sentenced in 2013), and the parole revocation fine was statutorily required to be imposed in an equal amount. (§§ 1202.4, subd. (b)(1), 1202.45, subd. (a).) While defense counsel asked for minimum fines and fees based on defendant’s indigence, and the trial court reduced some fines to their minimums based on defendant’s inability to pay, the court did not expressly state an intent to impose the minimum authorized restitution and parole revocation fines. Thus, it is not clear from the record whether the trial court imposed the $280 fines as the “minimum” statutory fines or merely as fines within the acceptable statutory range. On this record, defendant has not…