People v. Potter CA4/2
E076237
Cal. Ct. App.Oct 13, 2021Background
- In 2018 Potter pled guilty to 13 counts of grand theft (Harvey waiver on restitution) as part of a negotiated 10‑year sentence; remaining counts were dismissed.
- Squires Lumber (the victim) and Potter executed a 2015 civil settlement; Potter paid $450,835.61. The settlement stated Squires "will not request criminal restitution" but would "consider the sums paid under this Agreement to be an offset" if criminal restitution were ordered.
- The People sought about $6.3 million in criminal restitution (the full embezzled amount plus interest). Potter conceded the embezzlement amount but argued the civil release waived further restitution.
- The trial court concluded Squires had effectively waived additional restitution and ordered only the $450,835.61 already paid. The People timely appealed.
- The Court of Appeal held the civil settlement did not bar criminal restitution, treated the settlement as an offset, and remanded with directions to enter restitution of $6,300,827.27 minus the $450,835.61 offset = $5,849,991.66.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a victim's civil settlement/release can extinguish a criminal restitution obligation | The People: a civil settlement is at most an offset; a victim cannot waive the state's right to order restitution; restitution serves rehabilitative/deterrent goals beyond victim compensation | Potter: Squires' settlement and waiver language bars any further criminal restitution; defendant already paid restitution via civil settlement | The court held the settlement did not bar criminal restitution; the settlement functions as an offset only. Court reversed and remanded to enter restitution in full amount less the offset. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Bernal, 101 Cal.App.4th 155 (explaining a victim's civil release does not eliminate the state's restitution claim and restitution serves rehabilitative/deterrent goals)
- People v. Clifton, 172 Cal.App.3d 1165 (holding partial civil settlements do not preclude criminal restitution)
- People v. Gross, 238 Cal.App.4th 1313 (distinguishable facts discussed regarding settlements and restitution proceedings)
- People v. Hamilton, 114 Cal.App.4th 932 (recognizing victims' constitutional and statutory right to restitution)