People v. Nguyen CA3

Filed 10/4/21 P. v. Nguyen CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, C093197

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 17FE010115)

v.

RILEY NGUYEN,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant Riley Nguyen has asked this court to conduct an independent review of the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant filed his notice of appeal on November 23, 2020. Due to delays in the preparation of the record, and multiple extensions to the briefing schedule, this case was not fully briefed until August 13, 2021. Our review of the record discloses errors that require correction. We conclude any unpaid portion of the main jail booking fee and main jail classification fee is unenforceable and uncollectable as of July 1, 2021, and must be vacated. In addition, the trial court did not impose the mandatory parole revocation fine. We will modify the judgment to vacate the main jail booking and jail classification fees and impose the parole revocation fine. As modified, we affirm the judgment.

1

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.)

BACKGROUND In December 2017, a jury found defendant guilty of two counts of making criminal threats. (Pen. Code, § 422; statutory section citations that follow are to the Penal Code.) The trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on five years’ probation. The court also ordered a criminal protective order for the victim and a no contact order for the victim and the victim’s family. The court imposed a $300 restitution fine (§ 1202.4), an identical probation revocation fine stayed pending successful competition of probation (§ 1202.44), a $99.19 main jail classification fee (Gov. Code, § 29550.2), a $402.38 main jail booking fee (Gov. Code, § 29550.2, and various other fines and fees. The court waived probation fees and costs. We affirmed the judgment on appeal. (People v. Nguyen, (Mar. 28, 2019, C086305) [nonpub. opn.].) In 2020, the probation office filed a revocation of probation petition, alleging defendant had contacted the victim in violation of the criminal protective order and failed to obey all laws. Following a contested hearing, in which he represented himself, the trial court found defendant had violated probation by violating the protective orders. Accordingly, the trial court revoked defendant’s probation. The trial court sentenced defendant to the midterm of two years on one count of making criminal threats, and a consecutive term of eight months (one-third the midterm) on the second count, for an aggregate term of two years, eight months. The court awarded him 41 days of presentence custody credits and unstayed the probation revocation fine. The court did not impose and stay a parole revocation fine. (§ 1202.45.)