People v. Singletary CA1/1

Filed 8/25/25 P. v. Singletary CA1/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A170711 v. (San Francisco City & County RALPH SINGLETARY, Super. Ct. No. 23014758) Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Ralph Singletary appeals from the victim restitution order imposed after he pled guilty to evading an officer against traffic (Veh. Code, § 2800.4). We affirm. I. BACKGROUND In September 2023, police officers saw a Dodge Charger which had been reported stolen and was involved in a robbery. They conducted surveillance on the vehicle and coordinated a plan to apprehend it. Eventually, after leading law enforcement on a pursuit and while on the freeway, the Charger crashed into a sheriff’s department vehicle. Singletary and two other occupants exited the Charger and were apprehended.1

1 We take the facts of the offense from the police incident report as

summarized in the probation report. At the change of plea hearing, counsel

Singletary was charged with seven offenses, including evading an officer against traffic (Veh. Code, § 2800.4; count VI). He pled guilty to count VI. The plea agreement included, among other things, that Singletary pay restitution to the victim. The trial court sentenced Singletary to two years in prison and continued the matter for a restitution hearing. The Charger’s owner (victim) submitted a restitution claim to the probation department. According to the probation report, the victim requested $7,162.81 in restitution, comprised of $6,000 for vehicle repairs, $1,000 for personal property which had been in the vehicle, and $162.81 in rideshare costs. The victim advised the probation department that his vehicle was totaled and, at that time, he had not received payment from his insurance company. By the time of the restitution hearing, the victim’s insurance company had paid him $12,812.25. The trial court held the victim restitution hearing over two days in April and May 2024. The prosecutor presented a victim restitution report and explained that the victim was requesting $7,162 for his vehicle which was damaged in the police chase. According to the prosecutor’s and defense counsel’s representations of receipts included with the restitution report, the receipts demonstrated: the victim had spent $6,000 on vehicle repairs in August 2023 (prior to Singletary’s offense in September 2023); and the victim’s insurance company paid him $12,812.25 in October 2023.2 Defense