Skip to content
Name: People v. Hunt
Case #: B243715
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 4
Opinion Date: 01/25/2013
Summary

Where trial court imposes sentence but suspends execution and places defendant on probation, the court must impose a Penal Code section 1202.44 fine, but should not impose a Penal Code section 1202.45 parole revocation fine. Hunt pled no contest to a drug offense, admitting a strike, prior prison term, and a prior drug conviction. The trial court dismissed the strike and sentenced him to state prison, then suspended execution of the sentence and granted probation. Hunt was ordered to pay a restitution fine of $240 (Pen. Code, § 1202.4) and a like parole revocation fine (Pen. Code, § 1202.45). No probation revocation fine (Pen. Code, § 1202.44) was imposed. Held: Section 1202.44 fine imposed; section 1202.45 fine stricken. The Legislature enacted section 1202.44 in 2004, requiring that a probation revocation fine be imposed when a defendant’s sentence includes a period of probation. There is no evidence the Legislature intended imposition of fines under all three sections (1202.4, 1202.44, & 1202.45) when execution of sentence is suspended.