In re Crenshaw

Filed 4/12/07 In re Crenshaw CA4/1

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Relief granted.

A jury convicted Douglass L. Crenshaw of first degree murder committed during the commission of a robbery and burglary and by using a deadly weapon. The court sentenced him to prison for life without the possibility of parole. Crenshaw petitions for a writ of habeas corpus contending the sentencing court improperly imposed a parole revocation restitution fine under Penal Code section 1202.45^[1]("In every case where a person is convicted of a crime and whose sentence includes a period of parole, the court shall at the time of imposing the restitution fine pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 1202.4, assess an additional parole revocation restitution fine in the same amount . . . .").

Crenshaw is correct he is not subject to the parole revocation restitution fine and the People concede the fine is unlawful. (People v. Oganesyan (1999) 70 Cal.App.4th 1178, 1183.) In light of the concession, no purpose could reasonably be served by plenary consideration of the matter.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is modified to strike the restitution fine under section 1202.45. The superior court is directed to prepare an amended abstract of judgment reflecting the modification and forward it to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

HUFFMAN, J.

WE CONCUR:

McCONNELL, P. J.

McINTYRE, J.

Publication courtesy of California pro bono legal advice.

Analysis and review provided by La Mesa Property line attorney.

^[1] All statutory references are to the Penal Code.