People v. Soria
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
CORRIGAN, J.
The Penal Code requires the imposition of a restitution fine “[i]n every case where a person is convicted of a crime.” (Pen. Code, § 1202.4, subd. (b).) A suspended parole revocation restitution fine is also mandatory “[i]n every case where . . . [the] sentence includes a period of parole.” (§ 1202.45.) Here, the Court of Appeal held that when several separately filed cases are disposed of at a single hearing under a plea bargain, the cases have been “effectively consolidated” and only one set of fines may be imposed under sections 1202.4 and 1202.45. We reverse.
BACKGROUND
In…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- People v. GardeleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
- People v. GiordanoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
- People v. AveryCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
- People v. OatesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
- People v. FarellCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- People v. ScottCalifornia Supreme Court · 2014
- People v. CornettCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
- People v. VillalobosCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
- People v. SencionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
- People v. M.M.California Supreme Court · 2012
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.