P. v. Johnson
Filed 8/9/06 P. v. Johnson CA1/5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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 FIVE
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL JOHNSON, Defendant and Appellant. |
A111690
(Sonoma County Super. Ct. No. MCR377437)
|
Appellant Christopher Michael Johnson contends that the trial court erred in imposing additional fines following revocation of probation. We modify the judgment and affirm the judgment as modified.
Procedural Background
In May 2002, appellant Johnson pled no contest to one count of child endangerment (Pen. Code, § 273a, subd. (a)).[1] The trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed Johnson on probation. Johnson was ordered to pay a $200 restitution fine under section 1202.4 and a $200 suspended parole revocation fine under section 1202.45.
In April 2003, Johnson admitted a probation violation. The trial court imposed a six-year prison term, suspended execution of the sentence, and reinstated probation. In November, the court found that Johnson again violated probation and the court reinstated probation.
In August 2005, Johnson admitted another probation violation. The trial court revoked probation and sentenced Johnson to prison for six years on the child endangerment conviction. Johnson was ordered to pay two $200 fines under sections 1202.4 and 1202.45.[2]
Factual Background
According to the probation office's presentence report, in September 2000 Johnson was arguing with his wife while her 16-month-old son was sitting nearby in a highchair. The child started crying and Johnson struck him in the mouth, causing the child's mouth to bleed. Johnson's wife yelled at him for hitting the child and Johnson pushed the highchair over. The child's face hit the floor, knocking out one of his teeth.
Discussion
Citing People v. Chambers (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 819, Johnson contends the court erred in imposing new fines under sections 1202.4 and 1202.45 when it sentenced him to prison following revocation of probation. In Chambers, the trial court imposed a restitution fine under section 1202.4 when it granted probation and imposed another restitution fine under the same section when it revoked probation and sentenced Chambers to prison. (Id. at p. 821.) On appeal, the court of appeal held that â€
