People v. Dunham CA1/5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 12, 2026A172041California940 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

Dunham was the accounts manager for Smith River Community Services District (District), which “provides water service to approximately twenty-two hundred residents.” For roughly 22 months, she stole cash payments from those residents intended for the District. Dunham pled guilty to theft by a public officer (§ 424, subd. (a)), and the trial court denied

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1 probation and sentenced her to two years in state prison. At the restitution hearing, the District estimated that Dunham stole a total of $86,909.67. Because the District’s insurer, Allied World Insurance Company (Allied), had already reimbursed the District for $85,909.67 of those losses—leaving the District responsible only for its $1,000 deductible—the People asked the trial court to order Dunham to pay $1,000 to the District and $85,909.67 to Allied. Dunham did not object to this request, and the court issued two restitution orders: one ordering her to pay $1,000 to the District (District restitution order) and one ordering her to pay $85,909.67 to Allied (Allied restitution order). After we granted her motion for leave to file a belated notice of appeal,…

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.