Gemelli

People v. Gemelli

Bad Law
161 Cal. App. 4th 1539·2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 567·74 Cal. Rptr. 3d 901
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 18, 2008E043682California2,542 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ramirez, J.

Defendant Brenda Marie Gemelli pled guilty to second degree commercial burglary and appeals the amount of restitution ordered by the trial court pursuant to Penal Code section 1202.4, subdivision (f). She contends the amount of restitution ordered is not supported by substantial evidence, because the trial court solely relied on the victim’s unverified statement of losses and arbitrarily rejected her testimony disputing some of the items listed on the victim’s statement.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Defendant worked as a bookkeeper at a restaurant. The restaurant was burglarized, and paperwork referred to as “daily reports” were the only items determined to be missing following the burglary. Defendant became a suspect in the burglary because she had recently been fired by the restaurant owners who suspected she was embezzling money. The owners believed the missing paperwork would have shown whether defendant had embezzled money. Police found several shoe prints at the scene, which matched a pair of defendant’s shoes.

On February 23, 2007, defendant was charged with second degree commercial burglary in violation of section 459 (count 1) and with child abuse in…

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.