People v. Arreola

Full title: THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. FRANCISCO ARREOLA, SR., Defendant…

Court: COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento)

Date published: Jan 9, 2017

C081196 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 9, 2017)

Opinion

C081196

01-09-2017

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. FRANCISCO ARREOLA, SR., Defendant and Appellant.

Robie, Acting P. J.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Super. Ct. No. 15F01500)

Defendant Francisco Arreola, Sr., pled no contest to several charges related to a single incident of driving under the influence of alcohol. He also admitted three prior convictions for driving under the influence and being previously convicted of four strike offenses. The trial court sentenced defendant to an aggregate term of six years in state prison.

At sentencing, among other orders, the trial court ordered defendant "to pay the main jail booking, classification and security fees if he has the ability to pay them." The abstract of judgment indicates defendant was ordered to pay a booking fee of $367.81 and a classification fee of $67.03.

Defendant contends on appeal that the booking and classification fees were "erroneously imposed and reflected" in the abstract of judgment. The People agree the matter should be remanded to allow the trial court to issue a "definitive order which could be acted upon in the future." In other words, to determine whether defendant has the ability to pay the booking and classification fees. We agree.

Before ordering a defendant to pay booking and/or classification fees, a trial court must determine the defendant's ability to pay those fees. (People v. McCullough (2013) 56 Cal.4th 589, 598.) Here, the court said the defendant was ordered to pay those fees if he had the ability to do so. Despite that ruling, the court did not make any findings regarding defendant's ability to pay. We shall remand the matter so the trial court may determine defendant's ability to pay the challenged fees.

DISPOSITION

The order requiring defendant to pay a booking fee of $367.81 and a classification fee of $67.03 is vacated and the matter remanded to the trial court to determine the defendant's ability to pay. In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed.

/s/_________

Robie, Acting P. J. We concur: /s/_________
Murray, J. /s/_________
Hoch, J.