Preston

People v. Preston

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 217·43 Cal. App. 4th 450·50 Cal. Rptr. 2d 778·96 Daily Journal DAR 2830·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1698
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 11, 1996E015164California4,199 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hollenhorst, J.

The trial court dismissed a welfare fraud prosecution under Welfare and Institutions Code sections 11483 and 10980 because it found that a demand for restitution had not been made prior to the commencement of criminal proceedings. The trial court relied on People v. McGee (1977) 19 Cal.3d 948 [ 140 Cal.Rptr. 657 , 568 P.2d 38 .2] and its progeny, including this court’s decision in People v. Jordan (1978) 86 Cal.App.3d 529 [ 150 Cal.Rptr. 334 ].

The People appeal, contending that a prior demand for restitution is no longer necessary in cases of welfare fraud under these cases because of the 1984 amendments to section 11483, and the enactment of section 10980 at that time.

We agree that the older cases are no longer controlling following the 1984 legislation. Accordingly, since the trial court erroneously assumed that a prior demand was required, we reverse its order granting defendant’s motion to dismiss the action.

Facts and Procedural History

An eligibility worker for the San Bernardino County Department of Social Services testified at the preliminary hearing that defendant, Theresa Preston, received welfare benefits from 1991 to 1993. Benefits were awarded on the…

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.