People v. Alfieri CA3

California Court of Appeal Mar 3, 2016 No. C078085Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the judgment but remanded for the trial court to amend the abstract of judgment to remove a $30 criminal conviction assessment that conflicted with the court's oral pronouncement waiving all other fees.

Issues

Whether the trial court erred in including a $30 criminal conviction assessment in the abstract of judgment that was not part of the oral pronouncement of sentence.

Disposition. Affirmed and remanded with directions.

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Having reviewed the record as required by Wende, we affirm the judgment but order an amendment of the abstract of judgment, as we shall explain.”

“Where there is a discrepancy between the oral pronouncement of judgment and the minute order or the abstract of judgment, the oral pronouncement controls.”

Filed 3/3/16 P. v. Alfieri CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ----

THE PEOPLE, C078085

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 11F03766)

JEFFREY W. ALFIERI,

Defendant and Appellant.

This case comes to us pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). Having reviewed the record as required by Wende, we affirm the judgment but order an amendment of the abstract of judgment, as we shall explain. We provide the following brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.) FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In May 2011, defendant Jeffrey W. Alfieri zip tied the victims, laid them on the ground in a tire shop, pointed a shotgun at them, and demanded and took their money and identification. A complaint filed charged defendant with three counts of robbery. (Pen.

Code, § 211.)1 The complaint also alleged as to each count defendant personally used a firearm. (§ 12022.53, subd. (b).) Defendant pleaded no contest to two counts of robbery and admitted the personal use enhancements in exchange for a negotiated sentence of 12 years, to run consecutive to an unrelated federal term. The third count was dismissed with a Harvey2 waiver.3 The trial court sentenced defendant to an aggregate state prison term of 12 years (two years, the low term, on count 1, plus ten years for the firearm enhancement), and the same term on count two to run concurrent. The court awarded defendant 96 days of presentence custody credit. The court imposed a $240 restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)), a $240 suspended parole revocation restitution fine (§ 1202.45), and a $40 court security fee (§ 1465.8). The court expressly waived all other fines and fees. Lastly, the court ordered victim restitution as to count 1 and count 2 to be determined. Defendant did not obtain a certificate of probable cause. (Pen. Code, § 1237.5)4

People v. Alfieri CA3

AI Brief

THE PEOPLE, C078085

JEFFREY W. ALFIERI,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

MURRAY , J.

MAURO , J.

AI Brief