Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

The People v. Bruce Russell Guiver

August 16, 2011

THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
v.
BRUCE RUSSELL GUIVER, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.



(Super. Ct. No. CM033458)

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hoch , J.

P. v. Guiver

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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

Defendant Bruce Russell Guiver entered a no contest plea to transportation of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11379, subd. (a)) in exchange for dismissal of the remaining count of possession of methamphetamine for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378) and prior drug conviction allegation (Health & Saf. Code, § 11370.2, subd. (c)).

Sentenced to state prison, defendant appeals. He contends (1) the $40 court security fee imposed by the trial court must be reduced to $30, which was the amount in effect at the time he was convicted, and (2) the record fails to reflect that the prior drug conviction allegation was dismissed, requiring modification of the minutes. We modify the judgment, dismissing the prior drug conviction allegation, and order the minutes amended accordingly. We reject defendant's contention with respect to the court security fee.

Factual Summary

Defendant committed his offense on October 12, 2009, pled no contest on September 29, 2010, and was sentenced to state prison on November 24, 2010.

During the sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed various fines and fees, including a $40 court security fee pursuant to Penal Code section 1465.8.*fn1 Defendant did not object to the amount of the court security fee at the time of the hearing.

October 19, 2010, was the effective date of the amendment to section 1465.8, increasing the court security fee to $40.

Analysis

Defendant challenges the trial court's imposition of the $40 court security fee pursuant to section 1465.8. He argues the fee was imposed in error and must be reduced because he was convicted prior to the effective date of the amendment which increased the fee from $30 to $40. He claims he was "convicted" on September 29, 2010, the date he entered his plea. The People concede, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.