Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

The People v. Santos Anthony Villegas

December 3, 2010

THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
v.
SANTOS ANTHONY VILLEGAS, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.



APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Shahla Sabet, Judge. Affirmed. (Super.Ct.No. FWV027771)

The opinion of the court was delivered by: McKinster J.

P. v. Villegas

CA4/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

OPINION

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

I INTRODUCTION

On July 11, 2003, the trial court sentenced defendant and appellant Santos Anthony Villegas to nine years in state prison after he (1) pleaded guilty to carjacking under Penal Code*fn1 section 215; and (2) admitted the allegation that he committed the offense for the benefit of a criminal street gang within the meaning of section 186.22, subdivision (b)(1). The trial court ordered defendant to pay a $200 restitution fine under section 1202.4, with another $200 parole revocation restitution fine stayed pending successful completion of parole, and reserved jurisdiction as to victim restitution. Defendant waived his right to be present at subsequent restitution hearings.

On August 19, 2003, the trial court held a hearing to determine the amount of victim restitution. Defendant was not present but he was represented by counsel. Following stipulation by counsel, the court ordered defendant to pay $1,489.33 in victim restitution to Ruben Candelaria, and $120 to Cynthia Moya.

On May 21, 2010, defendant filed a motion to reduce the restitution fine and victim restitution order based on inability to pay. On May 24, 2010, the trial court denied defendant's motion.

On June 22, 2010, defendant filed a timely notice of appeal from the trial court's denial of his motion for reduction of the restitution order.

II STATEMENT OF FACTS

Defendant appeals from the court's order denying his motion for reduction of the victim restitution order. Therefore, the facts underlying defendant's convictions ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.