People v. Thompson CA3

Filed 5/23/24 P. v. Thompson CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, C099709

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 16FE010268)

v.

TRAVIS THOMPSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Travis Thompson appeals from a postjudgment order denying his motion for a hearing to reconsider his ability to pay a $10,000 restitution fine originally imposed when he was sentenced in 2017. The trial court denied the motion on the grounds that it lacked jurisdiction to hear it because defendant had begun serving his sentence and his judgment was long final. While this is not his first appeal as of right, defendant’s appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) and People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo), asking this

1

court to independently review the record to determine if there are any arguable errors that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant. Counsel’s Wende brief acknowledged that there may be a question regarding the appealability of the order defendant challenges.

Defendant filed a supplemental brief arguing that he had not been given an ability to pay hearing to determine whether he could pay the Penal Code section 1202.4 restitution fine in violation of due process. (Unless otherwise stated, statutory section citations that follow are to the Penal Code.) After considering the order’s appealability, we conclude the trial court lacked jurisdiction to entertain defendant’s motion and that defendant’s appeal must be dismissed.

FACTS AND HISTORY OF THE PROCEEDINGS While defendant was incarcerated in 2016, correctional officers observed another inmate pass him an object that he appeared to place in his sock. A subsequent search of defendant’s person revealed that defendant had a plastic object sharpened to a point in his sock. During the search, defendant physically assaulted a correctional officer, punching him several times before being subdued. A jury found defendant guilty of battery on a nonconfined person (§ 4501.5, count one); and possession of an inmate manufactured weapon (§ 4502, count two). The jury found true the allegation that defendant was armed with a stabbing weapon during the battery offense (§§ 667, subd. (e)(20(C)(iii), 1170.12, subd. (C)(2)(C)(iii)), and the trial court found two prior strike allegations true (§§ 667, subd. (e)(2), 1170.12, subd. (c)(2)). Defendant was sentenced to 25 years to life in prison for count one, to be served consecutively to any other sentence defendant was already serving; and a four-year term on count two was stayed (§ 654). The trial court imposed a $10,000 restitution fine (§ 1202.4) and an identical parole revocation restitution fine, which was suspended unless parole was revoked. (§ 1202.45.)