People v. Richards CA1/1

Filed 2/27/26 P. v. Richards CA1/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, A171039 v. ROYCE DEIONTE RICHARDS, (Contra Costa County Super. Ct. No. 01-22-01721) Defendant and Appellant.

Nine months after Royce Deionte Richards committed an assault and false imprisonment, his victim paid for one night in a motel room after seeing Richards drive by her home multiple times. In this appeal, Richards challenges $105.01 of the court’s restitution order on the grounds that the motel expense was not proximately caused by his criminal conduct. We affirm. I. BACKGROUND In June 2023, Richards pleaded guilty to numerous felony crimes committed against four different women on separate dates1 with the

All statutory references are to the Penal Code. Richards pleaded guilty 1

to committing assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury (§ 245, subd. (a)(4)) against four victims between June 2020 and May 2022, to committing false imprisonment by violence (§§ 236, 237) against the same 1

understanding he would be sentenced to six years in prison, subjected to 10- year criminal protective orders (§ 136.2, subd. (i)), and required to pay restitution to all victims on all counts including the dismissed counts, among other terms. Jane Doe 3, whose restitution claim is the subject of this appeal, was the victim of an assault and false imprisonment committed by Richards in November 2021. At the hearing when Richards pleaded guilty, and at his sentencing hearing, Jane Doe 3 appeared in court to object to the plea agreement. During the first hearing, before Richards pleaded guilty, Jane Doe 3 described the planned six-year prison sentence as “unacceptable” in part because, “for nearly a year, . . . [she] had to . . . suffer [Richards’s] freedom and see him at public parks”, which prevented her from taking her children there. She explained that she “stay[ed] in a hotel for an amount of time” and didn’t “sleep[] in [her] own bed for several months.” Jane Doe 3 had also learned of other people who were victimized by Richards and believed he “continued to show up and try to harass and intimidate . . . other victims.” Jane Doe 3 claimed Richards had left her “disfigured,” “bloody”, “and stranded[] in Vallejo.” The incident resulted in broken facial bones, a large lump behind her ear, and spitting “out blood for 13 days” after the attack. Crying, Jane Doe 3 explained, “it’s just a lot of embarrassment, and anxiety, and, you know, everything connected to it has been really overwhelming.” She also claimed she had “been living in fear for a long time now, because of