People v. Guy CA3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 14, 2022C094313California613 words

Opinion

Opinion

DISCUSSION

Defendant’s appointed counsel has asked this court to conduct an independent review of the record to 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

2 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. Our review of the record revealed that the judgment must be modified based on a new law that favors defendant. During the sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed a 10 percent collection fee for the $300 restitution fine under Penal Code2 section 1202.4. At the time of the sentencing hearing, this fee was permitted under former section 1202.4, subdivision (l), which stated: “At its discretion, the board of supervisors of a county may impose a fee to cover the actual administrative cost of collecting the restitution fine, not to exceed 10 percent of the amount ordered to be paid, to be added to the restitution fine and included in the order of the court, the proceeds of which shall be deposited in the general fund of the county.” In September 2021, while…

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.