Legal Opinion

People v. Harvest

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 31, 2000No. A087494PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

*645Opinion

HANLON, P. J.

In People v. Hanson (2000) 23 Cal.4th 355 [97 Cal.Rpfr.2d 58, 1 P.3d 650], our Supreme Court held that the double jeopardy provisions of the California Constitution prohibited a trial court from increasing a statutorily mandated restitution fine following retrial after appeal. The issue presented here is whether the same result applies to direct restitution to victims of crime. We conclude that court-ordered victim restitution imposed for the first time at a resentencing following appeal is not punishment and is therefore not constitutionally barred.

Background

Defendant…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Kennedy v. Mendoza-MartinezSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Hudson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  3. Helvering v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  4. United States v. UrserySupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  5. United States Ex Rel. Marcus v. HessSupreme Court of the United States · 1943

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Correa v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001

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

Powered by the Exa API