People v. Patterson CA3

Filed 3/16/21 P. v. Patterson CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Yolo) ----

THE PEOPLE, C091056

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CRF17664, CRF182863) v.

ROBERT ALLEN PATTERSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Robert Allen Patterson pled no contest to two felony charges in two separate cases. The court imposed the minimum restitution fines, as well as the mandatory court operations and court facilities assessments for the convictions. Defendant appeals the trial court’s finding he had the ability to pay the mandatory fines and fees imposed with his sentence, arguing the finding lacks sufficient evidence. We conclude the trial court properly imposed the restitution fines and mandatory assessments, correct errors in the abstract of judgment, and affirm the judgment.

1

I. BACKGROUND This appeal involves two cases. In the first, case No. CRF176654, defendant threw a drink at a car while on the highway. When defendant’s sister told him police had contacted her about the incident, defendant told her to fabricate a story about what had happened and threatened her. The prosecution charged defendant with two counts of dissuading a witness (Pen. Code, § 136.1, subd. (b)(1)),1 two counts of criminal threats (§ 422), one count of vandalism under $400 (§ 594, subds. (a), (b)(2)(A)), and throwing a substance at a car (Veh. Code, § 23110, subd. (a)). Defendant then failed to appear for a hearing (§ 1320, subd. (b)), resulting in case No. CRF182863. The prosecution amended the information in case No. CRF176654 to add a charge of influencing testimony (§ 137, subd. (a)), to which defendant pled no contest. Defendant also pled no contest to the failure to appear count in case No. CRF182863. The prosecution dismissed the remaining charges. The trial court sentenced defendant to 16 months in state prison, run consecutively to a prison sentence from an earlier case. The court also imposed for each of the two convictions a $300 restitution fine (§ 1202.4), plus a restitution collection fee of 10 percent, a $40 court operations assessment (§ 1465.8), and a $30 court facilities assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373). The court imposed and suspended a $300 parole revocation restitution fine (§ 1202.45) for each conviction. Defense counsel asked that all fines and fees be stayed based on defendant’s inability to pay, citing People v. Dueñas (2019) 30 Cal.App.5th 1157 (Dueñas). The court allowed the parties to submit briefing and set a hearing. At the hearing, defense counsel argued defendant would not be able to obtain work in state prison and was supporting his fiancée and two dependent children. The prosecution argued the imposed