Error and/or relief
The abstract of judgment incorrectly indicates a restitution fine of $3,400 to be paid, rather than the $2,400 imposed by the trial court. It must be corrected.
Holding:
[GARY NOTE: The court cited no authority for its order directing the trial court to correct the abstract of judgment–likely because the legal principle is well-established and seems obvious–but there is plenty of authority, which I cite below.]Authority:
People v. Mitchell (2001) 26 Cal.4th 181, 185 [holding reviewing courts have the inherent power on appeal to correct clerical errors found in court records, such as may be found in abstracts of judgment, whether on the court’s own motion or upon application of the parties]
People v. Jones (2012) 54 Cal.4th 1, 89
People v. Baker (2021) 10 Cal.5th 1044, 1109 [court has inherent power to correct clerical errors in abstract of judgment]