Mearns

People v. Mearns

Good Law
118 Cal. Rptr. 2d 511·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 3737·2002 Daily Journal DAR 3665·97 Cal. App. 4th 493·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3033
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 5, 2002No. B150613California3,639 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Turner, J.

*496 Opinion

I. Introduction

Defendant, Charles Sterling Meams, appeals from his conviction, based upon guilty pleas, for rape by force (Pen. Code, 1 § 261, subd. (a)(2)) and first degree burglary. (§ 459.) Defendant also admitted he was personally armed with a knife in the commission of the rape. (§ 12022.3, subd. (a).) Defendant’s sole contention on appeal is the trial court improperly ordered direct restitution to the victim for the difference between the cost of purchasing a new trailer and the sale price of her former mobilehome. Based on the provisions of section 1202.4, subdivision (f) and (f)(3)(I), we conclude the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding restitution to Susan F. for the costs of relocating to another residence after she was violently sexually assaulted in her mobilehome.

II. Factual Background Relevant to the Attack on Susan F.

We view the evidence in a light most favorable to the judgment. (Jackson v. Virginia (1979) 443 U.S. 307, 319 [ 99 S.Ct. 2781, 2789 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 ]; People v. Osband (1996) 13 Cal.4th 622, 690 [ 55 Cal.Rptr.2d 26 , 919 P.2d 640 ]; Taylor v. Stainer (9th Cir. 1994) 31 F.3d 907, 908-909 .) According the probation…

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.