Page 1
Restitution Award Based on Forfeited Rent Payments Was Proper in Case Judge Termed ‘Unusual’ —C.A.
By a MetNews Staff Writer
A woman who arrived at the apartment she had rented 11 days earlier and encountered two burglars—a woman and a man wielding a knife—was reasonable in her fear of continuing to reside in the unit and finding housing elsewhere, the Court of Appeal for this district has declared, concluding that she was entitled to the $5,085 restitution award that was granted based on the amount of her first and last month’s rent and a security deposit,.
In an unpublished opinion filed Monday, Div. Five affirmed the decision by Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Kathryn A. Solorzano in favor of Mariami Abalaki and against the burglars, Kristi Scotto and Ruben Montijo. Only Scotto appealed.
She had stipulated to an award of $650 covering the value of a ring she stole and damage to Abalaki’s bed but insisted that the order to pay the $5,085 was unsupported.
Solorzano acknowledged that it was “an unusual case” but said that under the circumstances, there was a “completely legitimate” reason for Abalaki vacating the premises and that ordering the burglars to compensate her for amounts the landlord would not return was “equitable.”
Agreeing, Justice Dorothy C. Kim wrote:
“Substantial evidence supports the trial court’s finding that defendant’s criminal conduct caused Abalaki to move out of her apartment and forfeit her deposit after living there less than one month. Defendant had lived in Abalaki’s apartment for 10 years, believed she had been wrongfully evicted from it, and still had keys to the apartment. Abalaki was told that defendant abused drugs. And defendant warned Abalaki. while Montijo held a knife, that ‘if she [did not] leave the apartment, it would not end up well.’ On this record, we find no abuse of discretion in the court’s restitution order.”
The case is People v. Scotto, B336756.
Copyright 2025, Metropolitan News Company