People v. Forest Abeyta CA3

Filed 3/23/21 P. v. Forest Abeyta CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Placer) ----

THE PEOPLE, C090674

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 62-157764)

v.

MICHAEL FOREST ABEYTA,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Michael Forest Abeyta appeals the trial court’s imposition of an incarceration fee and a booking fee for failure to state the fees’ statutory bases. He also asserts any incarceration fee is inapplicable and challenges the sufficiency of evidence supporting the imposition of the booking fee. We remand for the trial court to state the statutory bases for the fees. In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed.

1

BACKGROUND Defendant pleaded guilty to second degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a))1 for the killing of his wife Trang Tran. Tran’s remains were found scattered in a wilderness area near where a motorist spotted defendant trying to push his car off a cliff several months earlier. Defendant declared he strangled Tran during an argument after he sought a divorce. The trial court sentenced defendant to an indeterminate term of 15 years to life in state prison. At sentencing, defense counsel asked “the Court to consider [defendant’s] inability to pay,” stating defendant had no income and had outstanding debts, so counsel asked “the Court to impose the minimum fines.” The court noted it “considered the defendant’s ability to pay” and imposed an $8,000 restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)), an $8,000 parole revocation restitution fine (§ 1202.45), a $40 court operation fee (§ 1465.8), and a $30 criminal assessment fee (Gov. Code, § 70373). The court also ordered he pay $1,268 in victim restitution (§ 1202.4, subd. (f)), $553 “in a booking fee,” and “$172 in an incarceration fee.” Defendant did not object to any of the fines or fees imposed. DISCUSSION I Statutory Bases for Incarceration Fee and Booking Fee Defendant contends the court improperly imposed the $172 incarceration fee and $553 booking fee because it did not provide a statutory bases for the fees. The People agree. We stated in People v. High (2004) 119 Cal.App.4th 1192: “Although we recognize that a detailed recitation of all the fees, fines and penalties on the record may