People v. Leal CA3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 30, 2021C092133California467 words

Opinion

Opinion

DISCUSSION

Appointed counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts and procedural history of the case and requests this court review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days from the date the opening brief was filed. More than 30 days have elapsed, and defendant has not filed a supplemental brief. Having undertaken an examination of the entire record pursuant to Wende, we note that the trial court improperly imposed the restitution fine and parole revocation restitution fines per count. Penal Code2 section 1202.4, subdivision (b), requires the court impose a restitution fine “[i]n every case where a person is convicted of a crime.” Section 1202.45, subdivision (a) requires the court impose a matching parole revocation restitution fine in each case where defendant’s sentence includes a period of parole. Here, the court imposed a $300 restitution fine (§ 1202.4) on the vandalism charge, a $150 restitution fine (§ 1202.4) on the driving under the influence of an alcoholic beverage charge, and a $450 matching…

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.