People v. Watt CA2/8

DISCUSSION

We review the court’s restitution order under the deferential abuse of discretion standard. (People v. Giordano (2007) 42 Cal.4th 644, 663; People v. Santori (2015) 243 Cal.App.4th 122, 126.) We presume the order is correct, indulge all intendments and presumptions to support it on matters as to which the record is silent, “ ‘ “ ‘and error must be affirmatively shown.’ ” ’ ” (Santori, at p. 126.) “When there is a factual and rational basis for the amount of restitution ordered by the trial court, no abuse of discretion will be found by the reviewing court.” (People v. Dalvito (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 557, 562.) Article I, section 28 of the California Constitution states in relevant part: “(A) It is the unequivocal intention of the People of the State of California that all persons who suffer losses as a result of criminal activity shall have the right to seek and secure restitution from the persons convicted of the crimes causing the losses they suffer. [¶] (B) Restitution shall be ordered from the convicted wrongdoer in every case, regardless of the sentence or disposition imposed, in which a crime victim suffers a loss.” (Id., subd. (b)(13).) Penal Code section 1202.4…