People v. Lee CA2/5

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

After the jury rendered its verdict, the trial court sentenced defendant and set a restitution hearing for November 13, 2013. Defendant said he wanted to be present at the hearing. At the first scheduled restitution hearing, the court found that while defendant said he wanted to be present, he did not appear for the restitution hearing. His attorney said she did not have a phone number for defendant, and was not able to reach him. The court stated it would not issue a bench warrant since defendant had served his time on the case, and it was his choice whether to be present.2 The matter was continued. At the next hearing, defendant still was not present. His attorney said she “guess[ed] [defendant] didn’t really want to be here.” The prosecutor asked for more time to get a “medical statement” from the victim. The matter was again continued twice.

All further statutory references are to the Penal Code, unless otherwise stated.

2 Defendant was sentenced to six months in jail with credit for more than six months already served, therefore, the court ordered defendant’s immediate release. The clerk’s transcript erroneously records the sentence as 60…