People v. Ross CA3
Filed 9/13/23 P. v. Ross CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Tehama) ----
THE PEOPLE, C097897
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 21CR-001821)
v.
EMILY RAYANN ROSS,
Defendant and Appellant.
Defendant Emily Rayann Ross pled guilty to assault with a deadly weapon. After twice violating her probation, the trial court sentenced defendant to the low term of two years in state prison. On appeal, defendant contends the trial court erred in imposing two probation revocation fines and miscalculated her conduct credits. The People concede the errors. We will modify the judgment accordingly.
1
BACKGROUND In August 2021, defendant pled guilty to assault with a deadly weapon. (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1).)1 The trial court suspended imposition of sentence, placed defendant on two years’ probation, and ordered her to serve 165 days in county jail. The court imposed a $600 restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)) and a $600 probation revocation fine (§ 1202.44), stayed pending successful completion of probation. In May 2022, the probation department petitioned the court to revoke defendant’s probation. Defendant admitted violating her probation. Following her admission, the trial court reinstated defendant’s probation and ordered her to serve 120 days in county jail. The court ordered defendant to pay the fines and fees listed in the probation department’s report, including the previously stayed probation revocation fine.2 The court imposed a second probation revocation fine, stayed pending successful completion of probation. In September 2022, the probation department again petitioned the trial court to revoke defendant’s probation. Defendant again admitted violating her probation. Following her admission, the trial court terminated defendant’s probation and sentenced her to two years in state prison. At sentencing, the court awarded defendant 450 days of custody credit (226 actual and 224 conduct). The court also ordered defendant to pay the fines and fees listed in the supplemental probation report, including the two previously stayed probation revocation fines, now listed as $600 each and totaling $1,200, and a
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)