Legal Opinion

People v. Dalvito

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 16, 1997No. E018912PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

RICHLI, J.

Defendant contends on appeal that: (1) The court erred in awarding $15,950 in restitution to the victim for a stolen diamond necklace, because the victim’s loss (the amount he owed on the necklace) had been discharged in bankruptcy. Therefore, there was no loss, and the restitution award must be reduced by $15,950 in accordance with Penal Code section 1202.4; 1 and (2) even if section 1202.4 does not apply and restitution in this case is governed by the provisions of section 1203.04, this court should reduce the award by $15,950 because the trial court abused its discretion…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. People v. HarveyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  2. People v. Brian S.California Court of Appeal · 1982
  3. People v. WhisenandCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. People v. BirkettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
  2. People v. Johnny M.California Court of Appeal · 2002
  3. People v. MearnsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
  4. People v. AkinsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
  5. People v. FortuneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API