(Super. Ct. No. 05F08520)
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hull, J.
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
After his probation was revoked, defendant Jerome Marvin Hunter was sentenced to four years in state prison for assault with intent to commit rape (Pen. Code, § 220; undesignated statutory references that follow are to the Penal Code). He appeals, claiming that the trial court committed error in imposing various fines and fees against him. We strike the improper fines and fees and modify the judgment accordingly.
On June 8, 2006, pursuant to a plea bargain, defendant pleaded no contest to assault with intent to commit rape. On July 6, 2006, imposition of sentence was suspended and defendant was placed on probation for five years with one year of county jail time. The court further ordered that defendant's probation include conditions specified in the probation officer's report. As pertinent here, those conditions included: (1) a $200 restitution fine pursuant to section 1202.4; (2) an additional $200 restitution fine pursuant to section 1202.44, stayed pending revocation of probation; (3) a $20 court security fee pursuant to section 1465.8, subdivision (a)(1); (4) a $208.43 main jail booking fee pursuant to Government Code section 29550.2; and (5) a $24.09 main jail classification fee pursuant to Government Code section 29550.2.
On March 12, 2010, after a contested hearing, the court found that defendant committed several probation violations and revoked defendant's probation. That same day, defendant waived referral to the probation department and the court sentenced defendant to the middle term of four years. During the oral pronouncement of judgment, the court ordered that defendant "pay a restitution fine of $200 pursuant to Penal Code Section 1202.4." The court further stated that there are other "miscellaneous fees and surcharges, and those would be imposed as per standard practice, and they will be reflected in the order."
The order to which the trial court referred appears to be the minute order dated March 12, 2010. That minute order delineates the following fines and fees: (1) a $200 restitution fine pursuant to section 1202.4; (2) an additional $200 restitution fine pursuant to section 1202.45, suspended pending revocation of parole; (3) a $20 court security fee pursuant to section 1465.8; (4) a $30 criminal conviction assessment fee pursuant to Government Code section 70373; (5) a $270.17 main jail booking fee; and (6) a $51.34 main jail classification fee. All these fines and fees were reflected in the abstract of judgment dated March 12, 2010.
On appeal, defendant raises several challenges to the fines and fees the trial court imposed on March 12, 2010, upon revocation of his probation. We consider each fine/fee in turn.
The trial court initially imposed a $200 restitution fine under section 1204.4 in connection with defendant's grant of probation. The trial court then imposed a second $200 restitution fine under section 1202.4 upon the revocation of defendant's probation. Defendant challenges the second restitution fine. Defendant cites our decisions in People v. Chambers (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 819 (Chambers) and People v. Arata (2004) 118 Cal.App.4th ...