Restitution: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Non-economic damages. (''People v. Lehman'' (May 25, 2016, No. A144800) ___ Cal.App.4th ___, available at [http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/A144800.PDF].) | Non-economic damages. (''People v. Lehman'' (May 25, 2016, No. A144800) ___ Cal.App.4th ___, available at [http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/A144800.PDF].) | ||
==Amount of restitution== | |||
"As to a victim, the purpose of the restitution statute is to make that victim whole, not to give a windfall. [Victim] is not entitled to replace a used mixer with a brand new one at appellant's expense, absent some extraordinary facts. If [victim] were a car rental agency that lost a 1995 Ford Taurus, it would be entitled to the replacement value of a similar 1995 Ford Taurus, not a 1999 model." (''People v. Thygesen'' (1999) 69 Cal.App.4th 988.) | |||
===Replacement cost or repair cost=== | |||
People v. Stanley (2012) 54 Cal.4th 734 | |||
==Modifying restitution== | |||
After probation has expired, a trial court lacks jurisdiction to impose restitution. (''People v. Waters'' (2015) 241 Cal.App.4th 822.) | |||
"[A] trial court does not have jurisdiction to modify a defendant's probation to impose restitution after the defendant's probationary term has expired." (''Hilton v. Superior Court (2014) 239 Cal.App.4th 766.) | "[A] trial court does not have jurisdiction to modify a defendant's probation to impose restitution after the defendant's probationary term has expired." (''Hilton v. Superior Court (2014) 239 Cal.App.4th 766.) | ||
Penal Code section 1202.4(f)(1) | |||
Penal Code section 1202.46 | |||
People v. Moreno (2003) 108 Cal.App.4th 1 | |||
People v. Bufford (2007) 146 Cal.App.4th 966 | |||
Revision as of 23:22, 20 May 2017
Restitution
Non-economic damages. (People v. Lehman (May 25, 2016, No. A144800) ___ Cal.App.4th ___, available at [1].)
Amount of restitution
"As to a victim, the purpose of the restitution statute is to make that victim whole, not to give a windfall. [Victim] is not entitled to replace a used mixer with a brand new one at appellant's expense, absent some extraordinary facts. If [victim] were a car rental agency that lost a 1995 Ford Taurus, it would be entitled to the replacement value of a similar 1995 Ford Taurus, not a 1999 model." (People v. Thygesen (1999) 69 Cal.App.4th 988.)
Replacement cost or repair cost
People v. Stanley (2012) 54 Cal.4th 734
Modifying restitution
After probation has expired, a trial court lacks jurisdiction to impose restitution. (People v. Waters (2015) 241 Cal.App.4th 822.)
"[A] trial court does not have jurisdiction to modify a defendant's probation to impose restitution after the defendant's probationary term has expired." (Hilton v. Superior Court (2014) 239 Cal.App.4th 766.)
Penal Code section 1202.4(f)(1)
Penal Code section 1202.46
People v. Moreno (2003) 108 Cal.App.4th 1
People v. Bufford (2007) 146 Cal.App.4th 966