Sisuphan

People v. Sisuphan

Good Law
104 Cal. Rptr. 3d 654·181 Cal. App. 4th 800·2010 Cal. App. LEXIS 120
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 29, 2010A122351California6,307 words

Opinion

Opinion

Jenkins, J.

—Appellant Lou Suriyan Sisuphan took almost $30,000 from his employer’s safe, hoping that a coworker would be held responsible for its disappearance and be terminated. He was convicted of embezzlement (Pen. Code, § 508), and appeals from the judgment of conviction. Sisuphan contends that the trial court erred when it failed to instruct the jury that Penal Code section 512 provided a defense to embezzlement if the evidence showed (1) that at the time he took the money, he intended to return it, and (2) that he did so voluntarily before criminal charges were filed against him. He also asserts that the trial court erred in excluding evidence that he had fully restored the money to the company, claiming this evidence showed he never intended to keep it and therefore lacked the requisite intent for the crime. We reject these contentions and affirm the judgment.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

As the director of finance at Toyota of Marin (the dealership), Sisuphan managed the financing contracts for vehicle sales and worked with lenders to obtain payment for these transactions. He was responsible for ensuring that the proper paperwork was completed for each sale, and he…

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.