Opinion
B190525
5-4-2007
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CAESAR ESCOBAR, Defendant and Appellant.
Dennis L. Cava, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters and Steven E. Mercer, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Appellant Caesar Escobar appeals from a restitution order issued by the trial court after he pled no contest to robbery in violation of Penal Code section 211 and involuntary manslaughter in violation of section 192, subdivision (b). On February 23, 2006, the trial court ordered appellant to pay restitution for the victims medical and burial bills of $25,063.82 as follows: $505 to Providence Holy Cross Trauma; $761 to California Emergency Physicians; $ 6,547.02 to Mission Hills Catholic Mortuary; $10,699 to Providence Holy Cross Medical Center; and $6,551.80 to Catholic Cemeteries Archdiocese of Los Angeles. At a subsequent hearing on March 7, 2006, upon being informed by the People that the cemetery and the mortuary bills had been paid in full by the victims wife, Maria Del Carmen Gonzalez (Gonzalez), the trial court modified the order in part by ordering appellant to pay the amounts of $6,547.02 and $6,551.80 directly to Gonzalez.
We affirm and modify with directions.
CONTENTIONS
Appellant contends that the trial court erroneously ordered him to pay restitution to the trauma centers, doctors, and hospitals, which are not direct victims within the meaning of section 1202.4.
DISCUSSION
Section 1202.4, subdivision (f) provides that "in every case in which a victim has suffered economic loss as a result of the defendants conduct, the court shall require that the defendant make restitution to the victim or victims in an amount established by court order, based on the amount of loss claimed by the victim or victims or any other showing to the court." Section 1202.4, subdivision (a)(1) states that the victim of a crime who incurs any economic loss as a result of the crime "shall receive restitution directly from any defendant convicted of that crime." (Italics added.)
Only actual victims of crimes are entitled to restitution. (People v. Birkett (1999) 21 Cal.4th 226, 233.) Thus, it is proper for a trial court to order a defendant to pay restitution directly to a victims family for funeral expenses incurred as a result of the victims death caused by the defendants hit-and-run accident. (People v. Rubics (2006) 136 Cal.App.4th 452, 461.)
Here, the trial court scheduled a restitution hearing to determine the amount that appellant was "to make restitution to the victim pursuant to [section 1202.4, subdivision (f)]." (Italics added.) At the restitution hearing held on February 23, 2006, the trial court ordered appellant to pay restitution to the entities noted above. On March 7, 2006, upon being informed by the People that the cemetery and the mortuary bills had been paid in full by Gonzalez, the trial court ordered those amounts paid instead to Gonzalez.
It is clear that the trial court proceeded under section 1202.4, subdivision (f), pursuant to which the victims wife would receive restitution, but the trial court then improperly ordered the money to be sent on her behalf directly to the treating facilities. (People v. Birkett, supra, 21 Cal.4th at p. 233 [insurance companies that suffered the consequences of crime only by reimbursing the crime-related losses of their policyholders were not actual victims].) Instead, the trial court should have ordered restitution paid directly to Gonzalez.
We order the trial court to modify the February 23, 2006 order to direct those restitution payments to be made directly to Gonzalez.
DISPOSITION
The trial court is directed to modify the February 23, 2006, order to direct that all the restitution payments be made directly to Maria Del Carmen Gonzalez. In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed.
We concur:
DOI TODD, J.
ASHMANN-GERST, J. --------------- Notes: All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.