Legal Opinion

People v. Paul R.

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 28, 1996No. F023084PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

STONE (W. A.), Acting P. J.

In People v. Cotter (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 1671 [8 Cal.Rptr.2d 606], this court held a restitution fine cannot be imposed pursuant to Government Code section 13967, subdivision (a) if victim restitution imposed in lieu of all or a portion of that fine under subdivision (c) of that code section equals or exceeds the $10,000 maximum fine allowable under subdivision (a). In this case we will conclude that our reasoning in Cotter is equally germane to juvenile court restitution orders. In order to determine whether restitution ordered in this case exceeds the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. People v. ScottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Ford v. Arthur N.California Supreme Court · 1976
  3. People v. McNeelyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
  4. People v. CotterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
  5. People v. Steven F.California Court of Appeal · 1994

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. People v. BlackburnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
  2. People v. ChambersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  3. People v. CastilloCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
  4. People v. BlackburnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999

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

Powered by the Exa API