California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Ruiz, F068737 (Cal. App. 2016):
It is a pure question of law whether penalty assessments should be imposed. Accordingly, a de novo standard of review is used on appeal. (People v. Moore (2015) 236 Cal.App.4th Supp. 10, 14.)
Appellant contends the fees imposed pursuant to Health and Safety Code sections 11372.5 and 11372.7 do not apply to a conspiracy conviction. He relies upon People v. Vega (2005) 130 Cal.App.4th 183 (Vega). He further argues his counsel rendered ineffective assistance if this issue is deemed forfeited on appeal.
Page 12
Respondent asserts that appellant forfeited this issue on appeal because he failed to object to the fees and assessments at sentencing. If forfeiture did not occur, respondent relies principally upon People v. Sharret (2011) 191 Cal.App.4th 859 (Sharret) for the proposition these fees were properly imposed.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.