Cano

Cano v. State Board of Control

Good Law
1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 837·7 Cal. App. 4th 1162·9 Cal. Rptr. 2d 355·92 Daily Journal DAR 9173·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5823
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 30, 1992D014055California1,055 words

Opinion

Opinion

Nares, J.

This case concerns the interpretation of Government Code section 13960. Appellants David Cano, Sr., Ariel Cano, and David Cano, Jr., (collectively, the Canos) first submitted a claim for indemnification from the crime victims’ Restitution Fund established by Government Code section 13960 et seq. Relying on its interpretation of the statutes, the claim was thereafter denied by respondents State Board of Control (Board). The Canos then sought a writ of mandate in superior court, which was denied. The Canos appeal. We affirm.

Background

Vincent Rodriguez was murdered on November 21, 1987, thus becoming a victim of crime as defined by section 13960, subdivision (a)(1), that is, “[a] person who sustains injury or death as a direct result of crime.” (Hereinafter, a direct victim.) His surviving sister, Linda Rodriguez, was later compensated for mental health expenses because she also was a “victim” as defined by section 13960, subdivision (a)(4), that is, a “family member [who] has incurred emotional injury as a result of the crime.” (Hereinafter, a derivative victim.)

Linda Rodriguez has two children by her common law husband, David Cano, Sr. The three Canos were denied…

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.