Defendant Sentenced to 25 Years for Carjacking, Robbery and Kidnapping Appeals $10 Fine
If U.S. lawmakers are really interested in cutting unnecessary expenses, maybe they should begin with reading the case of People v. Valenzuela. After he plead guilty to serious crimes, Jacob Anthony Valenzuela appealed a $10 fine that was included in his sentence. Unfortunately, his case was brought to the Court of Appeal.
Valenzuela Appeals $10 Fine
Valenzuela was prosecuted for many serious felonies including carjacking, kidnapping, robbery and attempted murder. He plead guilty to many of these serious crimes and was sentenced to 24 years in prison. The judge also fined him per various penal code sections. One of these fines was a “crime prevention fine” provided for in Penal Code section 1202.
After Valenzuela got to prison, he decided he didn’t like the fact that the judge ordered him to pay the fine.
So, what do you think happened?
He was provided with the “public lawyer” at taxpayer expense who appealed the imposition of this $10 fine. This meant that the Attorney General of California had to spend hours of time opposing the appeal. Then, the Court of Appeals had to spend more time reading the briefs and finally issuing the opinion.
True Cost of a $10 Fine
Of course, the Court of Appeal upheld the $10 fine. However, it is extremely disturbing that our legal system allows a defendant serving a 24-year prison sentence to waste valuable taxpayer resources to bring such an appeal in the first place.
It is impossible to estimate how much money Valenzuela’s appeal wasted. However, when you add up the money that the state had to pay to his lawyer, the money that the Attorney General gets paid, and the salaries of the Court of Appeals justices to review the case and render its opinion, the total dollar amount is substantial.
Does anyone else think that something is wrong with our system when this type of thing is allowed to go on? We welcome your comments.
