People v. Phillips

California Court of Appeal Jul 2, 2010 No. F058534Published

Before: Dawson

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the $30 assessment under Government Code section 70373 applies to all convictions occurring on or after the statute's effective date, regardless of when the underlying criminal conduct occurred.

Issues

Whether the assessment under Government Code section 70373 applies to crimes committed before the statute's effective date if the conviction occurs after that date.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“We, however, agree with the Third District Court of Appeal that the date of conviction, not the date of the crime, controls application of the statute.”

“The Legislature’s decision to word section 70373 like the court security fee statute, after the latter statute had been interpreted by Alford, to apply to convictions occurring after that statute’s effective date shows that the Legislature intended the new assessment to apply to convictions occurring after the new statute’s effective date.”

Opinion

DAWSON, J.

In June of 2008, Jason Troy Phillips (appellant) pled guilty to possession of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a))

[477]

under a deferred entry of judgment, pursuant to Penal Code sections 1000 and 859a. In May of 2009, the court found appellant failed to comply with the deferred entry of judgment program and excluded him pursuant to Penal Code section 1000.3. It found appellant guilty based on his previously entered plea under Penal Code section 859a. The court sentenced appellant to a two-year term

and imposed various fees and fines, including a $30 assessment under Government Code section 70373 (section 70373).

Appellant contends only that the assessment imposed pursuant to section 70373 must, be stricken. Though members of this panel have previously agreed with this position, upon consideration of the opinion of the Third Appellate District in

People v. Castillo

(2010) 182 Cal.App.4th 1410 [106 Cal.Rptr.3d 688], we have concluded that it has the better view.

Section 70373

At sentencing, appellant was ordered to pay a $30 assessment pursuant to section 70373, subdivision (a)(1) (the assessment). Appellant argues the assessment is unauthorized and must be stricken because the crimes occurred before section 70373’s effective date. We, however, agree with the Third District Court of Appeal that the date of conviction, not the date of the crime, controls application of the statute.

(People v. Castillo, supra,

182 Cal.App.4th 1410.)

Subdivision (a)(1) of section 70373 provides in relevant part: “To ensure and maintain adequate funding for court facilities, an assessment shall be imposed

on every conviction for a criminal offense

.... The assessment shall be imposed in the amount of thirty dollars ($30) for each misdemeanor or felony . . . .” (Italics added; added by Stats. 2008, ch. 311, § 6.5, eff. Jan. 1, 2009.) Appellant committed his crime in 2008 and was sentenced in 2009. The issue is whether the statute applies where the crime was committed before the statute became effective.

People v. Phillips

AI Brief

DAWSON, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief