People v. Brocone CA4/1

DISCUSSION

As stated, appellate counsel asks the court to review the record for error. To assist the court in its review and in compliance with Anders, supra, 386 U.S. 738, counsel has identified one issue for consideration: Whether the trial court abused its discretion by ordering Brocone to pay $12,876.13 in restitution to R.A. even though R.A.’s insurance had paid all but $1,000 of the loss. The court did not abuse its discretion. (People v. Pittman (2024) 99 Cal.App.5th 1252, 1258 [review standard of a restitution order is abuse of discretion].) The California Constitution requires every crime victim be compensated by the defendant for losses incurred as a result of the defendant’s crime. (People v. Martinez (2017) 2 Cal.5th 1093, 1100, citing Cal. Const., art. I, § 28, subd. (b)(13).) The Legislature mandates that a crime victim who incurs an economic loss as a result of the crime receive restitution directly from the defendant. (Pen. Code, § 1202.4, subds. (a)(1) [“It is the intent of the Legislature that a victim of crime who incurs an economic loss as a result of the commission of a crime shall receive restitution directly from a defendant convicted of that crime”], (f)…