Guarneros

People v. Guarneros

Good Law
2016 Cal. App. LEXIS 946·2016 D.A.R. 11·208 Cal. Rptr. 3d 914·5 Cal. App. 5th 42
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 3, 2016D067267California3,412 words

Opinion

Opinion

Aaron, J.

I.

INTRODUCTION

Defendant Miguel Guarneros appeals from an order of the trial court denying his motion to reduce the restitution collection fee imposed on him in a criminal case. Guarneros pled guilty and agreed to pay victim restitution. The court ordered victim restitution and imposed a restitution collection fee of 15 percent of the total restitution ordered, pursuant to Penal Code section 1203.1, subdivision (/) (Section 1203.1(0) and San Diego County Code of Administrative Ordinances, article XX, section 363, subdivision (m) (Collection Fee Ordinance), which authorize the imposition of such a fee. Guarneros contends that the trial court’s denial of his request to reduce the 15 percent restitution collection fee was erroneous and amounts to an abuse of the court’s discretion. We reject Guarneros’s contention and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

II.

FACTUAT AND PROCEDURAT BACKGROUND

Guarneros ran a car dealership in Spring Valley, California. The business was required to file and pay sales tax to the Board of Equalization (BOE) on a quarterly basis from sales of cars. Between 2008 and 2011, Guarneros failed to remit to the state all of the sales tax that he…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.