People v. Saucedo CA2/6

Filed 3/3/26 P. v. Saucedo CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B338747 (Super. Ct. No. 23CR06498) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Santa Barbara County)

v.

MICHAEL ANGEL SAUCEDO,

Defendant and Appellant.

Michael Angel Saucedo appeals a judgment following his convictions for second degree robbery (Pen. Code,1 § 211; counts 1 and 3) and admissions that he used a dangerous or deadly weapon in committing the offenses (§ 12022, subd. (b)(1)) and suffered a strike prior conviction (§§ 667, subds. (b)–(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)–(d)). Pursuant to a negotiated disposition, the trial court sentenced Saucedo to nine years and four months in state prison.

1 Statutory references are to the Penal Code.

Saucedo contends the trial court erred in imposing a $2,700 restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)) and identical parole revocation fine (§ 1202.45, subd. (a)) without considering his ability to pay. Because Saucedo requested the court impose the minimum fine and the court did not consider his ability to pay and imposed fines exceeding the statutory minimum, we reverse and remand solely for reconsideration of imposition of the fines. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Saucedo was charged with two counts of second degree robbery (§ 211; counts 1 and 3) and four counts of assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1); counts 2, 4, 5 & 6). He filed a motion to reduce bail. The motion stated he “has been unemployed and has no financial resources. He is a client of the public defender and has been in custody on this case since September.” At the bail hearing, Saucedo filed a confidential financial affidavit.2 The court denied the motion to reduce bail. Pursuant to a plea agreement, Saucedo later pleaded guilty to both robbery counts and admitted deadly weapon and strike prior enhancements in exchange for a nine year and four month state prison sentence and dismissal of the remaining counts and enhancements. The parties agreed that any statutory fees and assessments were “to be determined.” The court did not direct probation to prepare a presentence report (§ 1203.10, subd. (a)). At sentencing, the court reviewed “the report prepared by probation in regards to firearms” (§ 29810, subd. (c)(1)), which did not include information about Saucedo’s financial condition. Saucedo’s counsel asked the trial court “to reduce fines and fees to the statutory minimum.” The