Filed 9/28/17 P. v. McMullen 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
(Amador)
----
| THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
MATTHEW CHESTER MCMULLEN,
Defendant and Appellant.
| C083172
(Super. Ct. No. 15-CR-24126)
|
Defendant Matthew Chester McMullen pleaded guilty to a single felony offense of grand theft of personal property for stealing a security camera from outside a restaurant. At sentencing, the court imposed a $60 criminal conviction assessment fee pursuant to Government Code section 70373,[1] which requires, among other things, a $30 assessment for each felony criminal conviction. Defendant contends and the People concede that the total fee imposed on defendant should be $30 rather than $60.
We agree with the parties and shall modify the judgment to reduce the fee to $30. We affirm the judgment as modified.
BACKGROUND
A detailed recitation of the facts underlying defendant’s offense is not necessary to resolve the issue on appeal. It suffices to say that in May 2016, defendant entered into a negotiated plea agreement whereby he agreed to plead guilty to a single grand theft charge and admit a prior strike conviction in exchange for a state prison term of 32 months, plus a fully concurrent term for admitting a community supervision (PRCS) violation in case No. 14-CR-22239. The trial court accepted the plea agreement and found the violation of PRCS true. The court sentenced defendant to 32 months for the grand theft, consisting of the low term of 16 months, doubled for the prior strike, and terminated PRCS in case No. 14-CR-22239. The court imposed various fines and fees, including a $60 criminal conviction assessment under section 70373. Defendant timely appealed.
DISCUSSION
Defendant contends, and the People concede, that the trial court improperly imposed a $60 criminal conviction assessment under section 70373. We agree. Section 70373 requires a court to impose an assessment “on every conviction for a criminal offense . . . in the amount of thirty dollars ($30) for each misdemeanor or felony . . . .” (§ 70373, subd. (a)(1).) Here, defendant pleaded guilty to a single felony offense of grand theft of personal property. (Pen. Code, § 487, subd. (a).) The assessment imposed under section 70373, therefore, should have been $30 and not $60.
Because the $60 assessment imposed pursuant to section 70373 was unauthorized, defendant’s failure to object below does not forfeit his claim on appeal. (People v. Crittle (2007) 154 Cal.App.4th 368, 371.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is modified to reduce the criminal conviction assessment to $30. As modified, the judgment is affirmed. The trial court is directed to amend the abstract of judgment accordingly and to send a certified copy of the amended abstract to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
/s/
Duarte, J.
We concur:
/s/
Blease, Acting P. J.
/s/
Renner, J.
[1] Further undesignated statutory references are to the Government Code.
