Super. Ct. No. 09F08232 APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sacramento County, Steve White, Judge.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Murray , J.
CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION*fn1
Defendant Antoine J. McCullough entered a plea of no contest to being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm (Pen. Code, § 12021, subd. (a)(1)) and admitted a prior prison term allegation (id., § 667.5, subd. (b)) in exchange for dismissal of the remaining counts and allegations and a stipulated state prison sentence of an aggregate term of four years. The court sentenced defendant accordingly.
Defendant appeals. The trial court granted defendant's request for a certificate of probable cause. (Pen. Code, § 1237.5.)
Defendant contends there is no evidence to support a finding of his ability to pay a $270.17 jail booking fee and a $10 crime prevention fine. He also claims the crime prevention fine is inapplicable to his crime and thus unauthorized. Finally, he claims that he is entitled to additional presentence custody credit pursuant to recent amendments to Penal Code section 4019.
In the published portion of the opinion, we hold that defendant forfeited his challenge to the booking fee by failing to object in the trial court.
In the unpublished portion of the opinion, we modify the judgment by striking the crime prevention fee and awarding additional credits.
The People concede that the trial court imposed an unauthorized $10 crime prevention fine. We accept the concession. Penal Code section 1202.5 authorizes a $10 fine for specified offenses. Defendant was convicted of violating Penal Code section 12021, which is not listed in Penal Code section 1202.5.*fn2 We will order the $10 crime prevention fine stricken. (See People v. Crittle (2007) 154 Cal.App.4th 368, 371-372 (Crittle).)
When defendant entered his plea, the trial court advised him that as a consequence, fees would be imposed. Having waived referral to probation, defendant was immediately sentenced following entry of his plea. When the court imposed the first fine, an $800 restitution fine, defense counsel asked that the court impose the statutory minimum amount of $200, claiming defendant was on a "fixed income." The court refused, finding $800 to be a "relatively low amount." Defendant does not challenge the restitution fine in this appeal. The court thereafter imposed other fees and fines to which defendant did not object, including a $20 court security surcharge fee, the unauthorized $10 crime prevention fine, a $51.34 jail classification fee not challenged in this appeal, and the $270.17 jail booking fee he does challenge.
The trial court did not cite the statutory authority for the $270.17 jail booking fee. Defendant suggests that it was imposed pursuant to ...