People v. Alford, 219 Cal. Rptr. 3d 594

Defendant Luis Alford pled guilty to possessing methamphetamine for sale (Health & Safety Code § 11378) and was sentenced to custody; the court imposed § 11372.5 laboratory and § 11372.7 drug program assessments ($205 and $615 respectively as entered).
After judgment, Alford moved to strike portions of those assessments, arguing each statutory assessment is a "fee," not a "fine/penalty," so Penal Code § 1464 and Government Code § 76000 penalty assessments should not be added.
The trial court denied the motion; on appeal Alford renewed the challenge to the imposition of the additional penalty assessments (the statutory ‘‘parasitic’’ assessments added on top of base fines/fees).
There is a split in Courts of Appeal: some decisions (Sierra, Martinez, Terrell) held the penalty statutes apply; others (Vega, Moore, Watts) concluded the special drug-related assessments are fees not subject to the penalty statutes.
The appellate panel here concluded Talibdeen (California Supreme Court) and the line of Court of Appeal cases treating the assessments as subject to the penalty statutes control, affirmed the judgment, and remanded only to correct and itemize the abstract of judgment.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Penal Code § 1464 and Gov. Code § 76000 penalty assessments may be levied in addition to the § 11372.5 laboratory assessment	Alford: § 11372.5 is an administrative "fee," not a "fine/penalty," so the penalty assessments do not apply	AG: § 11372.5 imposes a post‑conviction monetary obligation (described as fine/penalty in statute) and is subject to the mandatory penalty assessments	Court: Penalty assessments apply; Talibdeen and the Sierra/Martinez/Terrell line control; affirmed and remanded to itemize abstract
Whether Penal Code § 1464 and Gov. Code § 76000 penalty assessments may be levied in addition to the § 11372.7 drug program assessment	Alford: § 11372.7 is a "fee" (administrative/rehabilitative), not a fine, so penalty assessments should not be added	AG: § 11372.7 refers to the amount as a fine/penalty and ties it to criminal convictions, so penalty assessments apply	Court: Penalty assessments apply to § 11372.7 as well for the same reasons; affirmed

Talibdeen v. Superior Court, 27 Cal.4th 1151 (2002) (California Supreme Court assumed applicability of penalty assessments to § 11372.5 and held penalty assessments are mandatory absent the narrow § 1464(d) exception)
Sierra v. Municipal Court, 37 Cal.App.4th 1690 (1995) (held § 11372.7 drug program fee is a fine/penalty subject to § 1464 and § 76000)
Martinez v. Municipal Court, 65 Cal.App.4th 1511 (1998) (extended Sierra’s reasoning to hold § 11372.5 laboratory assessment is subject to penalty assessments)
Watts v. Superior Court, 2 Cal.App.5th 223 (2016) (First Dist. disagreed with Sierra/Martinez, reasoned the laboratory assessment is a fee not subject to penalty assessments)
Vega v. Superior Court, 130 Cal.App.4th 183 (2005) (held § 11372.5 is not punishment and characterized it as an administrative fee)
People v. Alford, 42 Cal.4th 749 (2007) (distinguished assessment types; recognized that assessments arising from convictions are generally punitive but analyzed factors supporting nonpunitive character of a different fee)