People v. Isla CA3

Filed 10/24/23 P. v. Isla CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (San Joaquin) ----

THE PEOPLE, C097067

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. MANCRFE20190009993) v.

REGIE ISLA,

Defendant and Appellant.

After defendant Regie Isla pled guilty to multiple offenses, including committing lewd or lascivious acts with a child, the trial court ordered defendant to pay $3,018,499 in victim restitution. On appeal, defendant contends that the trial court’s restitution order violated his constitutional right to a jury trial. We will affirm.

1

I. BACKGROUND1 In July 2019, the victim reported to police that defendant had repeatedly sexually abused her. The abuse began when she was 13 years old. The victim told police that defendant would place his mouth on her vagina, penetrate her vagina digitally, and then have sexual intercourse with her several times a week for over six years. The People charged defendant with multiple crimes, including continuous sexual abuse of a child (Pen. Code, § 288.5, subd. (a))2 and three counts of unlawful sexual abuse (§ 261.5, subd. (d)). Defendant ultimately pled guilty to multiple offenses including committing lewd or lascivious acts with a child under the age of 14 years (§ 288, subd. (a)). At the sentencing hearing, the victim told the court that every day she “still continue[s] to discover all the ways that the abuse [she] suffered ha[d] affected [her] life psychologically, shaped [her] whole being, [and] destroyed [her] teenage and early adulthood that every kid deserves.” She reiterated that the sexual abuse occurred “almost every week of every month” and admitted that she “even attempted to take [her] own life.” The trial court ultimately sentenced defendant to a total of 6 years in prison, including the middle term of six years for committing lewd or lascivious acts and a concurrent term of two years for another count. Pursuant to the California Constitution and section 1202.4, the People requested victim restitution, including noneconomic losses for psychological harm. (Cal. Const., art. I, § 28, subd. (b)(13); § 1202.4, subd. (f)(3)(F).) At the restitution hearing, a psychologist and a vocational rehabilitation counselor opined as to the effect of the sexual abuse on the victim personally, as well as on her future life care plan and lost earning capacity. Based on their expert opinions, the trial court ordered defendant to pay