The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hull ,j.
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
Defendant Armando Guadalupe Rojo pleaded no contest to voluntary manslaughter (Pen. Code, § 192, subd. (a); statutory references that follow are to the Penal Code), assault with a firearm (§ 245, subd. (a)(2)), and admitted gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(c)) and personal use of a firearm allegation (§ 12022.5, subd. (a)(1)).
Defendant David Guadalupe Rojo pleaded no contest to two counts of attempted murder (§§ 664/187), and to a single count each of voluntary manslaughter (§ 192, subd. (a)), and carrying a concealed, loaded firearm in a vehicle (§ 12031, subd. (a)(1)). Defendant also admitted street gang and personal use of a firearm allegation (§§ 12022.5, subd. (a)(1), 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(C)).
The court imposed a stipulated term of 32 years on Armando Rojo, and a stipulated term of 36 years and four months on David Rojo. The court ordered both defendants to pay $12,608.95 in victim restitution.
On appeal, the defendants argue the award of victim restitution was excessive. We shall modify the restitution award and affirm the judgments as modified.
On September 1, 2008, Francisco Prior was sitting in the front passenger seat of a van driving down Bridge Street in Yuba City. A Honda Civic driven by defendant Armando Rojo pulled up alongside the van. Defendant David Rojo, a passenger in the Civic, began shooting at the van. Francisco Prior died from multiple gunshot wounds as a result of the attack. Two other people were in the van when David Rojo shot at it.
The Probation Department reported that Prior's family was entitled to victim restitution of $7,796.50 in economic damages related to lost wages and funeral expenses. It also determined the family was entitled to restitution for medical expenses as follows: (1) $2,663.41 for medical expenses paid by Medi-Cal for Prior's treatment, consisting of $1,185.75 paid to the hospital, $121.66 to the ambulance service, and $1,356 to the UC Davis School of Medicine Billing Professional Group (the hospital submitted a $22,386.30 bill and UC Davis a $84,849 bill, but UC Davis wrote off the portion of the bill not paid by Medi-Cal); (2) the entire $1,001 bill from Sutter Buttes Imaging (SBI), even though Medi-Cal paid $790, since SBI asked for the total bill so they could reimburse Medi-Cal on their own; and (3) $1,148.04, the remaining balance on the $1,269.70 bill from the ambulance company after Medi-Cal paid $121.66. The total restitution recommended was $12,608.95.
At the restitution hearing, the trial court indicated it was inclined to follow the Probation Department's recommendation. Counsel for both defendants objected to everything but the $7,796.50 in economic losses for the Prior family. Finding Medi-Cal could seek reimbursement from the Prior family in the future, the trial court ordered the full $12,608.95 in restitution.
Defendant Armando Rojo contends the trial court was not authorized to order victim restitution for medical bills beyond the amount reimbursed by Medi-Cal. The Attorney General agrees. Defendant David Rojo contends the trial court was not authorized to award any of the $4,812.45 in restitution for medical expenses. He argues that Medi-Cal and the medical providers were third parties rather than ...