Court Opinion

ID: 9839630
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-13 17:03:54.735241+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:38:10.473761
License: Public Domain

Filed 9/13/23 P. v. Ross CA3
                                           NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for
publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication
or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

                IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
                                      THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
                                                       (Tehama)
                                                            ----

 THE PEOPLE,                                                                                   C097897

                    Plaintiff and Respondent,                                   (Super. Ct. No. 21CR-001821)

           v.

 EMILY RAYANN ROSS,

                    Defendant and Appellant.

         Defendant Emily Rayann Ross pled guilty to assault with a deadly weapon. After
twice violating her probation, the trial court sentenced defendant to the low term of two
years in state prison. On appeal, defendant contends the trial court erred in imposing two
probation revocation fines and miscalculated her conduct credits. The People concede
the errors. We will modify the judgment accordingly.

                                                             1
                                     BACKGROUND
       In August 2021, defendant pled guilty to assault with a deadly weapon. (Pen.
Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1).)1 The trial court suspended imposition of sentence, placed
defendant on two years’ probation, and ordered her to serve 165 days in county jail. The
court imposed a $600 restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)) and a $600 probation
revocation fine (§ 1202.44), stayed pending successful completion of probation.
       In May 2022, the probation department petitioned the court to revoke defendant’s
probation. Defendant admitted violating her probation. Following her admission, the
trial court reinstated defendant’s probation and ordered her to serve 120 days in county
jail. The court ordered defendant to pay the fines and fees listed in the probation
department’s report, including the previously stayed probation revocation fine.2 The
court imposed a second probation revocation fine, stayed pending successful completion
of probation.
       In September 2022, the probation department again petitioned the trial court to
revoke defendant’s probation. Defendant again admitted violating her probation.
Following her admission, the trial court terminated defendant’s probation and sentenced
her to two years in state prison. At sentencing, the court awarded defendant 450 days of
custody credit (226 actual and 224 conduct). The court also ordered defendant to pay the
fines and fees listed in the supplemental probation report, including the two previously
stayed probation revocation fines, now listed as $600 each and totaling $1,200, and a

1      Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.
2     The probation department erroneously lists that previously stayed restitution fine,
which was $600, as a $900 fine.

                                             2
$600 parole revocation fine under section 1202.45, stayed pending successful completion
of parole.3
                                       DISCUSSION
       Defendant contends the trial court incorrectly awarded her only 224 days of
presentence conduct credit when she served 226 days in custody prior to sentencing. The
People agree defendant served 226 days in custody before she was sentenced. They also
agree she is entitled to conduct credits based on the total number of days spent in
custody, even though those days were not served continuously, for a total of 226 days of
custody credit. (See People v. Culp (2002) 100 Cal.App.4th 1278, 1284.) The People
thus concede the trial court erred in awarding defendant only 224 days of conduct credit.
Having reviewed the law and the record, we accept the People’s concession.
       Defendant contends, and the People concede, the trial court erred when it ordered
defendant to pay an additional and unauthorized probation revocation fine upon
reinstating her probation in May 2022. We accept the People’s concession and modify
the judgment accordingly.
       Section 1202.44 provides that “[i]n every case in which a person is convicted of a
crime and . . . a sentence that includes a period of probation is imposed, the court shall, at
the time of imposing the restitution fine . . . , assess an additional probation revocation
restitution fine in the same amount . . . . This additional probation revocation restitution
fine shall become effective upon the revocation of probation . . . .” (Italics added.)
       Here, the trial court did just that when it initially placed defendant on probation: it
ordered defendant to pay a restitution fine of $600 and stayed a section 1202.44 probation
revocation fine in the same amount. The trial court had no statutory authority to impose a
second restitution fine on defendant when it revoked and reinstated her probation in May

3     The probation department report incorrectly identifies the parole revocation fine as
one imposed under section 1202.44.

                                              3
2022. (See People v. Chambers (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 819, 822 [“Restitution fines are
required in all cases in which a conviction is obtained. Furthermore, there is no provision
for imposing a restitution fine after revocation of probation”]; accord, People v. Perez
(2011) 195 Cal.App.4th 801, 805.) Accordingly, we will strike the second $600
probation revocation fine.
                                      DISPOSITION
       The judgment is modified to award defendant two additional days of presentence
conduct credit and to strike the second probation revocation fine (§ 1202.44), reducing
the total probation revocation fine from $1,200 to $600. We direct the clerk of the trial
court to prepare an amended abstract of judgment reflecting defendant’s total presentence
custody credit to be 452 days (226 days of actual credit and 226 days of conduct credit)
and to pay a single probation revocation fine of $600. We further direct the clerk of the
trial court to forward a certified copy of the amended abstract of judgment to the
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. In all other respects, we affirm the
judgment.

                                                     /s/
                                                 EARL, P. J.

We concur:

    /s/
HULL, J.

    /s/
ROBIE, J.

                                             4