People v. Subramanyan

Filed 2/29/16 (Opinion modified and certified for publication 3/30/16. Modified opinion below.)

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE APPELLATE DIVISION OF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE

THE PEOPLE, CASE NO. 30-2014-00752821

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 12NM00343)

v. OPINION

GANESH SUBRAMANYAN,

Defendant and Respondent,

CRAIG ODEN,

Real Party in Interest and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, North Justice Center, James H. Poole, Judge. Dismissed. * * * Victim and Appellant Craig Oden appeals the trial court‟s order denying him further restitution. On appeal, Oden argues that the trial court erred by denying him restitution for the attorney‟s fees he paid his civil lawyer. As explained below, Oden, as a crime victim, lacks standing to bring this appeal on his own. For this reason, we dismiss the appeal.

1

Factual and Procedural Background On January 11, 2012, the District Attorney on behalf of Plaintiff, the People, filed a complaint against Defendant and Respondent Ganesh Subramanyan alleging that he was driving under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol concentration of .20 percent or more and caused a collision resulting in bodily injury to Oden. (Veh. Code, §§ 23153, subds. (a), (b), 23538, subd. (b)(2).) Subramanyan pled not guilty. On August 23, 2012, the People amended the complaint to add counts 3 and 4 for driving under the influence of alcohol and driving with a blood alcohol concentration of .08 percent or more (Veh. Code, § 23152, subds. (a), (b)), and dismissed counts 1 and 2. Subramanyan then pled guilty to the newly added charges. The trial court sentenced Subramanyan to three years of informal probation, payment of a fine of $390 (with a $50 credit for time served), service of time in jail (stayed pending completion of community service and CALTRANS), and payment of restitution on all counts, including the dismissed ones, as determined by Victim Witness. The trial court awarded Oden restitution of $12,800 at sentencing for lost wages between the date of the collision and sentencing. On September 26, 2014, the trial court heard Oden‟s motion for additional restitution. Oden was seeking an additional $109,803.84, to pay for Oden‟s attorney‟s fees incurred in Oden‟s civil action against Subramanyan. The amount sought was in addition to the $12,800 restitution Oden had already received. After a hearing and the admission of multiple exhibits, the trial court denied the motion. On October 22, 2014, Oden timely filed his notice of appeal.