Pangan

People v. Pangan

Good Law
152 Cal. Rptr. 3d 632·2013 Cal. App. LEXIS 82·213 Cal. App. 4th 574
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 4, 2013No. G046491California4,795 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Bedsworth, J.

I. INTRODUCTION

This is a driving under the influence with injury case (Veh. Code, § 23153) in which the .trial judge’s conscientious and painstaking calculation of a restitution award failed to take into account the time value of money. When the court computed the value of the victim’s $246.50 per month in pension benefits, it multiplied that monthly benefit by a calculated likely lifespan and ordered a payment of $70,000. Defense counsel did not object, and defendant was hit with a restitution order that overstates the victim’s actual economic loss by,thousands of dollars.

We now hold:

II. FACTS

Rommel Pangan was convicted of causing great bodily injury while driving under the influence. (See Pen. Code, § 12022.7.) He was sentenced to six *577 years in prison. The victim was Oscar Muniz, who sustained serious injuries, including broken ribs, back fractures, and a bad knee injury when his vehicle was hit by Pangan’s vehicle traveling down Beach Boulevard on January 23, 2009. This court affirmed Pangan’s conviction in an unpublished opinion filed June 30, 2011. (People v. Pangan (June 30, 2011, G043845) [nonpub. opn.].)

Pangan had no car insurance. The case returned…

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.