People v. Yeoman CA3
Filed 5/10/16 P. v. Yeoman CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Nevada) ----
THE PEOPLE, C080146
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. F14000376)
v.
JENNIFER ASHLEY YEOMAN,
Defendant and Appellant.
While employed at Retailer’s Credit Association (RCA), defendant Jennifer Ashley Yeoman had access to credit card information for 165 of RCA’s clients, and improperly used at least five individuals’ information to purchase goods. Defendant’s crimes caused a security breach at RCA and were a substantial factor in RCA losing its biggest client, Sierra Nevada Memorial Hospital (SNMH). Defendant pleaded no contest in three separate cases to insurance fraud, identity theft, petty theft, and obtaining money by false pretences. As part of her sentence, she
1
was ordered to pay $102,888.40 in victim restitution to RCA. Defendant contends RCA was not a direct victim of her crimes and therefore was not an eligible victim for restitution, and the People agree. We vacate the restitution order in favor of RCA and otherwise affirm the judgment.
FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS
RCA, a consumer collections agency, hired defendant on July 2, 2014 as a consumer collector. RCA gave defendant access to credit card information for RCA’s clients on July 9, 2014. After learning defendant was facing criminal charges for identity theft and unauthorized use of another person’s credit card, RCA terminated defendant’s employment on July 11, 2014. Approximately four days later, RCA learned one of its clients, Kelli C., had fraudulent charges on her credit card. Further investigation revealed defendant had fraudulently used the account information of at least five of RCA’s clients, including Kelli C. All five of those individuals were SNMH accounts. RCA also identified 160 additional clients whose personal information was potentially compromised during defendant’s employment and sent each a letter notice about the potential breach. Sheila Baker, RCA’s owner, contacted the police, who searched defendant’s home and found multiple items sent to defendant’s address that were in the names of two RCA clients. These two individuals, along with a third RCA debtor client, confirmed to police they all had fraudulent activity on the credit cards they had on file with RCA. Police arrested defendant. Three or four weeks after discovering defendant’s misconduct, RCA notified its largest client, SNMH, of the security breach and sent the hospital copies of the 160 letters RCA sent to potential victims. SNMH had been an RCA client for over 30 years and represented 75 percent of RCA’s client base and revenue. In September 2014, SNMH terminated its contract with RCA, citing RCA’s “failure . . . to timely notify” the hospital
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)