People v. Molina-Lopez CA1/2

Filed 11/18/21 P. v. Molina-Lopez CA1/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. A161682

JESUS MOLINA-LOPEZ, (Sonoma County Super. Defendant and Appellant. Ct. No. SCR-729614-1)

At a December 2020 victim restitution hearing, the trial court ordered defendant Jesus Molina-Lopez, convicted of stalking, to pay $22,176 in restitution to the California Victim Compensation Board (Board), the amount the Board paid to the victim of Molina-Lopez’s crime for a year of lost wages she suffered as a direct result of his criminal conduct. Molina-Lopez’s appellant counsel filed a brief requesting that we independently review the court’s restitution order under People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). We concluded there were no arguable issues other than what we stated in a supplemental briefing order, in which we asked if the trial court abused its discretion by finding the prosecution met its prima facie burden of establishing Molina-Lopez should pay $22,176 to the Board and by denying Molina-Lopez’s counsel’s request for a continuance of the hearing. Upon review of the parties’ supplemental briefing, we conclude the court abused its discretion by not allowing Molina-Lopez’s counsel a continuance, vacate the

1

court’s order and remand the matter to the trial court to grant a reasonable continuance to Molina-Lopez and hold further restitution proceedings. In light of our conclusion, we do not address whether the trial court abused its discretion in finding the prosecution met its prima facie burden. BACKGROUND In July 2019, the Sonoma County District Attorney filed a felony complaint alleging Molina-Lopez unlawfully threatened his female neighbor (Pen. Code, § 422, subd. (a)), resisted arrest (id., § 148, subd. (a)(1)) and committed a miscellaneous offense of stalking (id., § 646.9, subd. (a)). The court subsequently accepted Molina-Lopez’s plea of no contest to stalking (id., § 646.9, subd. (a)) and dismissed the other charges. The court found him guilty of stalking, sentenced him to 36 months of formal probation and 90 days in jail and imposed various fines and fees. In December 2020, the court conducted a victim restitution hearing. The prosecution presented Exhibit 1, which contains documents that indicate the Board paid the victim $22,176 for one year of wages lost as a result of Molina-Lopez’s criminal conduct, and the prosecution sought a court order that Molina-Lopez pay that amount to the Board. The documents in Exhibit 1 include a certification by a Board custodian of records that the attached documents “are accurate reproductions of bills that were submitted to and paid by the Board in the amounts indicated, by or on behalf” of the victim. The custodian further stated that the bills were for “income loss” and the amount paid was $22,176.00. The custodian also stated that the documents received from the victim were redacted to protect her privacy and safety. Exhibit 1 also includes two Board payment statements, one dated May 13, 2020, and showing a payment of $18,480 for the time period from