People v. Clark CA3

Filed 4/15/16 P. v. Clark CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Siskiyou) ----

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, C076978

v. (Super. Ct. Nos. 131225, 12286)

JERRED ADAM CLARK,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Jerred Adam Clark challenges the propriety of a restitution fine imposed on him by the trial court in 2013 pursuant to Penal Code section 1202.4, subdivision (b)(1).1 He claims that because the trial court improperly “stayed” a portion of the fine, the fine is unauthorized and must be either stricken in its entirety or reduced to the initially unstayed amount only. He did not, however, appeal from the order of

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

probation in which the fine was imposed. He filed his notice of appeal in 2014, after the trial court revoked his probation and sentenced him to state prison. We conclude we lack jurisdiction to review the propriety of the challenged fines imposed in 2013. We do, however, have jurisdiction to review the fines imposed in 2014, the orders from which defendant appeals. We will impose the mandatory postrelease community supervision revocation restitution fines that were not imposed when the trial court sentenced defendant to state prison in 2014. We also order a correction of the abstract of judgment to reflect the correct case number for an amount still owing on a probation revocation restitution fine for a misdemeanor conviction. In all other respects, we affirm the judgment. BACKGROUND A recitation of the facts underlying defendant’s convictions is unnecessary to the resolution of the instant appeal. We provide the following summary of the pertinent procedural history of the relevant criminal proceedings. In case No. 12-0286, defendant pleaded guilty to inflicting corporal injury on a spouse or cohabitant (§ 273.5, subd. (a)) and admitted a prior domestic violence conviction (former § 273.5, subd. (e), Stats. 2007, ch. 582, § 1) in exchange for three years’ probation and a dismissal of other charges. In 2012, the trial court suspended imposition of sentence, granted defendant probation for a period of three years, and imposed, in addition to other statutory fines and fees, a restitution and a probation revocation restitution fine of $1,200 each.2 However, the trial court “stayed” all but $240