Creath

People v. Creath

Good Law
1995 Cal. App. LEXIS 6·31 Cal. App. 4th 312·37 Cal. Rptr. 2d 336·148 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2172·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 189
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 4, 1995B078018California2,742 words

Opinion

Opinion

Grignon, J.

Defendant and appellant Ronald J. Creath appeals from a judgment after a jury trial resulting in his conviction of grand theft by embezzlement and filing false income tax returns. While a union officer, defendant used a union-issued credit card and other union funds to pay his personal expenses amounting to more than $250,000. In the published portion of this opinion, we conclude defendant did not present substantial evidence of a claim-of-right defense to the charge of grand theft by embezzlement. Thus, we do not address his contentions that the trial court misinstructed on that defense.

In the unpublished portion of this opinion, we address defendant’s contentions that the trial court (1) failed to instruct the jury on mistake of law as a defense to, and erred in giving a general intent instruction on, the tax return charges; and (2) committed sentencing error in imposing the upper term. We also address the prosecution’s contention that the trial court erred by failing to order direct restitution to the victim. We affirm.

Procedural Background

Defendant was charged by information with one count of grand theft by embezzlement between January 1, 1985, and December 31,…

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.