Skip to content
Name: Gholipour v. Superior Court (San Diego County)
Case #: D072235
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 10/24/2017
Summary

When a Court of Appeal vacates a restitution award in a case that has been transferred to another county under Penal Code section 1203.9, the transferring court retains jurisdiction to impose a new restitution order consistent with the appellate court’s instructions on remand. Following Gholipour’s convictions for fraud and perjury, the San Diego County Superior Court imposed a split sentence and entered a restitution award. While her appeal in the case was pending, Gholipour completed the custody portion of her sentence and was released on mandatory supervision. She began living in Orange County, and the San Diego court granted her motion to transfer her case and supervision to Orange County pursuant to section 1203.9. The Court of Appeal subsequently reversed the restitution order and remanded the case to the trial court to conduct further restitution proceedings consistent with the opinion. Gholipour moved in the San Diego court for an order directing that the restitution amount be determined by the Orange County court. The San Diego court found that it had jurisdiction to determine restitution and denied Gholipour’s motion. She filed a petition for a writ of mandate challenging the court’s order. Held: Petition denied. When a person has been released on probation or mandatory supervision, section 1203.9 requires transfer of his or her case to the county where the person resides. The transferring court must determine the restitution amount before the transfer unless that determination cannot be made within a reasonable time. If a case is transferred without a determination of the amount of restitution, the transferring court “shall complete the determination as soon as practicable.” (Pen. Code, § 1203.9, subd. (a)(3).) After analyzing the statute and legislative materials, the Court of Appeal concluded that there had not yet been a final determination of Gholipour’s restitution amount based on her successful appeal and, as a result, the San Diego court retained jurisdiction over the matter of restitution.

The full opinion is available on the court’s website here: http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/D072235.PDF