Trial court properly imposed fines under both Penal Code sections 672 and 1205.5 in a burglary case. Uffelman pleaded guilty to burglary. The court ordered him to pay fines under both Penal Code sections 672 and 1205.5. Uffelman appealed, arguing that the fine under 672 was unauthorized. Held: Affirmed. Where a criminal statute does not provide for the imposition of a base fine in addition to a jail or prison sentence, section 672 provides that the trial court may impose a fine of up to $1,000 for misdemeanors or $10,000 for felonies. Section 1205.5 prescribes a mandatory $10 fine for burglary and other theft offenses. The statutory language and legislative history of section 1205.5 show that the $10 theft fine should be imposed in addition to other fines or penalties, and that it is to be collected to fund local crime prevention programs. The Court of Appeal concluded that “[s]ection 1202.5 simply does not prescribe a base fine for the listed offenses so as to foreclose a fine under section 672.” Furthermore, Uffelman’s construction of the statutes would lead to absurd results. Under his construction, a trial court would be limited to imposing a $10 fine in robbery, carjacking, and burglary cases, but would be permitted to impose greater fines for lesser crimes like misdemeanor receiving stolen property ($1,000) and vehicle theft ($5,000) simply because those crimes were not listed in section 1202.5. The court declined to construe the statutory scheme to provide for such an inequitable result.