P. v. Ayala-Vega
A jury found Jonathan Ayala-Vega guilty of first degree residential burglary and found true the allegation that a person other than an accomplice was present at the time. After finding unusual circumstances, the trial court suspended the imposition of sentence and placed him on formal probation for three years. It also imposed various fines, fees and assessments. Vega does not challenge his conviction, but contends that the trial court abused its discretion in imposing probation conditions (1) prohibiting him from being around any firearms, (2) requiring him to obtain the probation officer's approval as to where he lives and works, and (3) prohibiting or regulating his access to alcohol. He also asserts the trial court erroneously failed to orally pronounce fines, fees and assessments included in the judgment (order granting probation) and that some of the fees are incorrect.
As discussed below, some of Vega's contentions have merit. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment (order granting probation) as modified and remand the matter to the trial court for resentencing limited to the imposition of the fines, fees and assessments.
Comments on P. v. Ayala-Vega