People v. Rodriguez CA5, F080232

Defendant Vicente Rodriguez was convicted by a jury of sexual intercourse with a child 10 or younger (Pen. Code §288.7(a)), oral copulation with a child 10 or younger (§288.7(b)), and lewd/lascivious acts on a child under 14 (§288(a)(1)).
The child victim (A.), born 2008, described multiple nighttime incidents; a recorded CFIT forensic interview was played for the jury; mother and sister provided corroborating testimony that defendant had been in the girls' bedroom.
At sentencing the court imposed 25-to-life (count 1), consecutive 15-to-life (count 2), and a determinate 8-year term (count 3), and assessed a $108.19 jail booking fee under former Gov. Code §29550.2 payable to the City of Madera.
On appeal Rodriguez argued trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object when A. briefly related overhearing a friend tell mother that defendant had assaulted that friend (an uncharged act).
Rodriguez also sought vacatur of the booking fee under Assembly Bill No. 1869 (Gov. Code §6111), which—he argued—made any unpaid balance unenforceable as of July 1, 2021.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to object to a brief CFIT statement that A. overheard a friend recount an alleged assault by defendant	Counsel's omission was a reasonable tactical choice and not prejudicial; omission may have helped defense argue A. learned details by overhearing	Failure to object to hearsay about an uncharged act violated right to effective assistance and prejudiced outcome	No ineffective assistance: plausible tactical reasons for not objecting; even if deficient, no prejudice given limited, undetailed statement, lack of prosecutor emphasis, and strong case against defendant
Whether the $108.19 jail booking fee must be vacated under AB 1869 (Gov. Code §6111)	The unpaid balance of fees identified in former statutes is unenforceable/ uncollectible as of July 1, 2021; statute mandates vacatur of any portion of a judgment imposing those unpaid costs	The fee should be stricken (defendant) or, alternatively, becomes uncollectible by operation of law without court action (People)	Judgment modified: any balance of the booking fee that remained unpaid as of July 1, 2021 is vacated and the abstract/records must be corrected

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two-part ineffective assistance standard)
People v. Ledesma, 43 Cal.3d 171 (applies Strickland standard in California)
People v. Greeley, 70 Cal.App.5th 609 (construed Gov. Code §6111 to make unpaid portions of specified fees unenforceable and to require vacatur of those portions of judgments)
People v. Lopez-Vinck, 68 Cal.App.5th 945 (held §6111 permits modification of judgment to vacate unpaid balances of identified fees)