Skip to content
Name: People v. Brasure
Case #: S072949
Court: CA Supreme Court
District CalSup
Opinion Date: 02/07/2008
Summary

The trial court erred in instructing pursuant to CALJIC No. 2.11.5 (unjoined perpetrators) in an unmodified form when some of appellant’s accomplices, or possible accomplices, testified at trial. In this death penalty case resulting in kidnap and torture-murder convictions, several accomplices testified for the prosecution, but others did not. Because some did testify at the trial, it was error for the trial court to give CALJIC No. 2.11.5 without modifying it. (See People v. Jones (2003) 30 Cal.4th 1084, 1113.) But since the court gave the jury a full set of instructions on assessing witness credibility in general, and accomplice testimony in particular, the error was not prejudicial.
Victim restitution is not limited to physical injuries, but can also include loss of income from psychological injuries. The decedent’s mother told the probation officer she had accrued $2500 in expenses for attending trial and approximately $100K in lost wages because she had been unable to work for two years following her son’s murder. The court ordered appellant to pay $102,500 in victim restitution. The Supreme Court upheld the restitution order. The restitution statute does not distinguish between economic losses caused by physical injuries and those caused by psychological trauma. (See Pen. Code, § 1202.4, subd. (f).)