People v. Beckkoch CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 4, 2026G065307California956 words

Opinion

Opinion

STATEMENT OF FACTS

I.

PROSECUTION CASE

In January 2023, the victim, a 71-year-old man, reported fraudulent bank activity on his account. The police investigated three unauthorized charges on his account: (1) $1,481.78 for Phyllisophical (a women’s clothing store); (2) $127.66 for Monat Global (a health and wellness business); and (3) $25 for PayRange Mobile (a mobile laundry payment application). The former charge was made on January 17, 2023. The police then spoke with the owner of Phyllisophical and requested the receipt for the $1,481.78 charge along with surveillance video. The receipt indicated “‘[b]ill to Mallory Beck.’” The surveillance video was no longer available for the police to review, but the store owner previously reviewed the video footage and testified that it depicted defendant. Another store employee testified that she had helped defendant and recognized the receipt. Defendant had been to the store multiple times before the incident. In March 2023, the store owner told a police investigator that defendant was back at the store. The investigator arrived and spoke to defendant. She allowed the investigator to look at a mobile payment application called Cash App…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.