P. v. Bills
P. v. Bills
02:10:2006
P. v. Bills
Filed 1/27/06 P. v. Bills CA1/4
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FOUR
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
DOUGLAS KEITH BILLS,
Defendant and Appellant.
A110961
(Humboldt County
Super. Ct. No. CR973393S)
Douglas Keith Bills appeals from an order denying his motion to modify his sentence to reduce the restitution fine. His counsel raises no issues and asks this court for an independent review of the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.)
In 1998, defendant was convicted of inflicting unjustifiable physical pain and suffering on a child, with the enhancement that he personally inflicted great bodily injury during the commission of the offense in 1997. (Pen. Code, §§ 273a, 12022.7.) The court sentenced defendant to 11 years in state prison on conditions including that he pay restitution in the amount of $2,200 pursuant to Penal Code section 1202.4, subdivisions (b) and (m). Division Four of the First Appellate District affirmed the judgment of conviction (People v. Bills (Dec. 8, 1998, A083199) [nonpub. opn.]).
On April 25, 2005, defendant moved to modify the sentence to reduce the restitution fine to $200 on the ground that there was no evidence that he had the ability to pay the fine. On June 6, 2005, the court denied the motion, finding that the court had discretion to impose the fine and that the probation report contained evidence of defendant's financial ability to pay the fine.
Defendant was represented by counsel at the hearing. There are no meritorious issues to be argued.
DISPOSITION
The order is affirmed.
________________________
RIVERA, J.
We concur:
___________________________
REARDON, Acting P. J.
Courtesy of San Diego Employment Lawyers (with http://www.mcmillanlaw.us.), and San Diego Lawyer Directory ( http://www.fearnotlaw.com)
___________________________
SEPULVEDA, J.
02:10:2006
Filed 1/27/06 P. v. Bills CA1/4
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FOUR
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
DOUGLAS KEITH BILLS,
Defendant and Appellant.
A110961
(Humboldt County
Super. Ct. No. CR973393S)
Douglas Keith Bills appeals from an order denying his motion to modify his sentence to reduce the restitution fine. His counsel raises no issues and asks this court for an independent review of the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.)
In 1998, defendant was convicted of inflicting unjustifiable physical pain and suffering on a child, with the enhancement that he personally inflicted great bodily injury during the commission of the offense in 1997. (Pen. Code, §§ 273a, 12022.7.) The court sentenced defendant to 11 years in state prison on conditions including that he pay restitution in the amount of $2,200 pursuant to Penal Code section 1202.4, subdivisions (b) and (m). Division Four of the First Appellate District affirmed the judgment of conviction (People v. Bills (Dec. 8, 1998, A083199) [nonpub. opn.]).
On April 25, 2005, defendant moved to modify the sentence to reduce the restitution fine to $200 on the ground that there was no evidence that he had the ability to pay the fine. On June 6, 2005, the court denied the motion, finding that the court had discretion to impose the fine and that the probation report contained evidence of defendant's financial ability to pay the fine.
Defendant was represented by counsel at the hearing. There are no meritorious issues to be argued.
DISPOSITION
The order is affirmed.
________________________
RIVERA, J.
We concur:
___________________________
REARDON, Acting P. J.
Courtesy of San Diego Employment Lawyers (with http://www.mcmillanlaw.us.), and San Diego Lawyer Directory ( http://www.fearnotlaw.com)
___________________________
SEPULVEDA, J.
| Description | A criminal court decision on Inflicting pain to a child. |
| Rating |
