216 Cal. App. 4th 212
Cal. Ct. App.2013Background
- Fisher was convicted of delivering a letter with intent to extort money or other property under § 523 and a prior prison term allegation was found true.
- He was sentenced to county jail with an aggregate term of four years and appealed challenging multiple aspects.
- The letter threatened vandalism to a business's vehicles unless the victim employed him, and he admitted writing and delivering it.
- Trial evidence showed Fisher sought a job and that the letter referenced seeking employment at Susanville Towing, where the owner Phillips was the target of the extortion threat.
- Fisher argued the demand was for a job, not money or property, and claimed he did not intend actual extortion, but the People argued a job is a form of property under the extortion statute.
- The Court of Appeal reversed in part and affirmed in part: credit and sentencing corrections were required, and the restraining order was unauthorized and must be vacated.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the demand for a job is a demand for property under § 523 | People: job equals money/property via extortion statute | Fisher: job does not constitute property | Sufficient evidence; job demand qualifies as property under extortion. |
| Whether Fisher is entitled to day-for-day custody credits | People: credits as awarded were sufficient | Fisher: entitled to one-for-one credits | Entitled to day-for-day credits; total 182 days. |
| Whether the restraining order was authorized | People: order appropriate | Fisher: order unauthorized | Restraining order vacated for lack of statutory authority. |
| Whether sentencing minutes improperly reflect a two-strike sentence | People: minutes correct | Fisher: two-strike reference erroneous | Delete two-strike reference in sentencing minutes; otherwise affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Kozlowski, 96 Cal.App.4th 853 (Cal. App. 2002) (broad interpretation of 'property' in extortion rulings recognizing intangible property)
- People v. Kwok, 63 Cal.App.4th 1236 (Cal. App. 1998) (house key as property; intangible property included in extortion analysis)
- Spatarella v. N.Y., 313 N.E.2d 38 (N.Y. 1974) (employer's business or right to employ as property for extortion purposes)
- People v. Carpenter, 15 Cal.4th 312 (Cal. 1997) (extortion property doctrine supportive of broader reading)
- People v. Scott, 9 Cal.4th 331 (Cal. 1994) (restraining order authority standards)