People v. Moreno CA5

Filed 6/13/14 P. v. Moreno CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, F066284 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. VCF260220) v.

ROBERTO CISNEROS MORENO, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tulare County. Valeriano Saucedo, Judge. Gordon S. Brownell, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Catherine Chatman and Raymond L. Brosterhous II, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Gomes, Acting P.J., Poochigian, J. and Sarkisian, J.† † Judge of the Fresno Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.

Defendant Roberto Cisneros Moreno was convicted by jury trial of numerous sex crimes.1 The trial court sentenced him to prison for a term of 15 years to life, plus a consecutive 84-year term. Defense counsel asked that the court consider reducing the recommended $10,000 restitution fine in light of the lengthy prison term. The court complied by reducing the restitution fine to $5,000, but it nevertheless imposed a $10,000 parole revocation restitution fine. On appeal, defendant challenges the $10,000 parole revocation restitution fine and also asks that we order correction of errors on the abstract of judgment. We conclude his claims have merit. DISCUSSION I. Fines Defendant contends the restitution fine and the parole revocation restitution fine must match in amount. The People concede and we agree. Penal Code section 1202.4, subdivision (b)2 provides for restitution fines: “In every case where a person is convicted of a crime, the court shall impose a separate and additional restitution fine, unless it finds compelling and extraordinary reasons for not doing so and states those reasons on the record.” Former section 1202.45, now section 1202.45, subdivision (a) provides for matching parole revocation restitution fines: “In every case where a person is convicted of a crime and [his or her] sentence includes a period of parole, the court shall[,] at the time of imposing the restitution fine pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 1202.4, assess an additional parole revocation restitution fine in the same amount as that imposed pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 1202.4.…” (Italics added.)