People v. Crittle

Opinion

SCOTLAND, P. J.

A jury convicted defendant Emanueal Duane Crittle of carjacking and robbery, and found he personally used a fireann in committing his crimes. Sentenced to an aggregate term of 13 years in state prison, he appeals.

In the published portions of this opinion, we conclude that (1) a $20 court security fee (Pen. Code, § 1465.8) must be imposed based on a conviction for which punishment has been stayed pursuant to Penal Code section 654, and (2) a $10 crime prevention fine (Pen. Code, § 1202.5, subd. (a)) can be

[370]

imposed only once in a case, rather than for each conviction in a case. Defendant’s other contentions are addressed in the unpublished parts of the opinion. We shall modify the judgment and affirm as modified.

FACTS

*

DISCUSSION

I, II*

in

Penal Code section 1465.8, subdivision (a)(1) provides for the imposition of a $20 court security fee “on every conviction for a criminal offense.” (Further section references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise specified.)

Because defendant was convicted of two offenses, the trial court imposed $40 in court security fees. However, pursuant to section 654, the court stayed the punishment for the robbery conviction. According to defendant, the stay precluded the court from imposing a $20 court security fee for that conviction. We disagree.

Section 654, which prohibits multiple punishment for the same act or course of conduct and generally bars the use of a conviction for “any punitive purpose” if the sentence on that conviction is stayed

(People v. Pearson

(1986) 42 Cal.3d 351, 361 [228 Cal.Rptr. 509, 721 P.2d 595]), does not apply to a court security fee because that fee is not punishment.