Arce

People v. Arce

Good Law
226 Cal. App. 4th 924
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 29, 2014A138376California2,975 words

Opinion

Opinion

Humes, J.

Defendant Christian Arce pleaded guilty to assault with a firearm. He appeals from a postjudgment order requiring him to pay restitution to compensate the victim for economic losses. He contends that the order must be reversed because (1) the People waived their ability to seek such restitution; (2) the portion of the order compensating the victim for future lost wages lacks a rational basis; and (3) his trial counsel was ineffective by not seeking a discount of that portion of the order to account for its present-day value. We reject these claims and affirm.

I.

' Factual and Procedural Background

In September 2009, Arce shot the victim in the hand after an argument outside a nightclub in San Francisco. Arce fled, but he was soon apprehended. He was charged with felony counts of attempted murder and assault with a firearm and misdemeanor counts of unlawful possession of a loaded firearm and resisting, obstructing, or delaying a peace officer. Several enhancements were also alleged. In connection with the attempted murder charge, Arce was alleged to have personally and intentionally discharged a firearm. In connection with the assault charge, Arce was alleged to have…

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.