People v. Aldana
206 Cal. App. 4th 1247
Cal. Ct. App.2012Background
- Aldana and Matney were charged with two counts of grand theft and multiple counts under section 424, including knowingly keeping false accounts and altering public records.
- Matney, hospital administrator, hired Aldana to perform administrative services; Aldana signed blank timesheets that Matney completed and approved for TAP pay.
- Timesheets covered two-week periods and did not accurately reflect Aldana’s daily hours; Matney estimated hours to record on the sheets.
- Aldana was paid with TAP funds for other work, including painting, based on timesheets that did not reflect actual time spent.
- Trial verdicts: Aldana and Matney were convicted only of knowingly keeping false accounts (424(a)(3)); other charges were acquitted and enhancements were found untrue.
- The appellate court originally reversed, and after Supreme Court Stark v. Superior Court guidance, reaffirmed that Aldana’s conviction must be reversed and Matney’s conviction was unsupported due to materiality concerns.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Aldana falls within 424(a)(3). | Aldana controlled public funds via TAP payments. | Aldana did not have authority over disbursement of funds. | Aldana not within 424(a)(3); judgment reversed. |
| Whether Aldana knowingly kept a false or made a false entry in a TAP timesheet. | Aldana signed blank timesheets. | Aldana did not make any entry; Matney completed them. | Insufficient evidence of false entry by Aldana; conviction reversed. |
| Whether 424(a)(3) requires material falsity for a conviction. | Timesheets were false; materiality assumed. | Materiality absent; no loss or risk to public funds. | Materiality required; timesheets not materially false; Matney reversed. |
| Whether Matney knowingly kept a false account or made a false entry. | Timesheets reflected misspecified hours for Aldana. | No knowledge of unlawfulness; hours not material and no loss. | No material falsehood; conviction reversed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Groat v. People, 19 Cal.App.4th 1228 (Cal. Ct. App. 1990s) (control over public funds key to 424(a)(3) liability)
- Stark v. Superior Court, 52 Cal.4th 368 (Cal. 2011) (materiality requirement for 424(a)(3); ‘knowingly keeps’ requires material falsehood)
- Evans, 112 Cal.App.3d 607 (Cal. Ct. App. 1980) (emergency check requisitions as first step in disbursement case)
- Dillon, 199 Cal.1 (Cal. 1926) (legislative intent to protect public moneys)
- Kraft, 23 Cal.4th 978 (Cal. 2000) (substantial evidence standard for appellate review)
- Bolin, 18 Cal.4th 297 (Cal. 1998) (substantial evidence review; standard of proof)
- Gonsalves v. Hodgson, 38 Cal.2d 91 (Cal. 1951) (material misrepresentation relevance in fraud context)
- Bower v. AT&T Mobility, LLC, 196 Cal.App.4th 1545 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011) (civil fraud materiality principles cited in criminal context)