P. v. Martin
Filed 6/23/06 P. v. Martin CA1/2
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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 TWO
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JASON ANTHONY MARTIN, Defendant and Appellant. | A110776 (Napa County Super. Ct. No. CR105759 & 106725) |
I. INTRODUCTION
Appellant pled no contest to drug charges asserted in two informations filed by the Napa County District Attorney. He later admitted violating several probation orders issued in those cases, as a consequence of which he was ultimately sentenced to state prison. In both cases, the sentences imposed by the trial court included fees and fines imposed under Health and Safety Code sections 11372.5, 11372.7 and 11377.[1] The parties agree that these fees and fines must be recomputed and the bases for such recomputations put on the record. We agree and thus reverse and remand for this limited purpose.
II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Neither the facts of the underlying crimes nor the various admitted probation violations are pertinent to the issues on appeal. What is pertinent is that, in the combined cases, the court's sentences included numerous fees and fines required by the referenced statutes, as augmented apparently pursuant to the requirements of other statutes.
The trial court imposed apparently identical fees and fines for each of the appellant's two section 11377 offenses as follows: $155 under section 11372.5, $465 under section 11372.7, and $217 under section 11377 itself. But the â€
