Court Opinion

ID: 9731693
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 15:54:38.634807+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:26:20.399806
License: Public Domain

REYNOSO, J.
I dissent. Before defendant can be prosecuted for violation of Penal Code section 118 (peijury), the People are required to show an attempt to obtain restitution of the money obtained as aid for dependent children. That is the teaching of People v. McGee (1977) 19 Cal.3d 948 [140 Cal.Rptr. 657, 568 P.2d 382], The trial court so ruled.
McGee did not deal with Penal Code section 118 (perjury); rather, it dealt with Welfare and Institutions Code section 11483 (fraud). The court analyzed the statutory procedures “intended to provide a measure of protection to individuals suspected of welfare fraud.” (McGee, supra, at p. 965.) Can it be said that the procedure protects the individual with one hand (fraud) but takes it away with the other (perjury)? Like the trial court, I conclude that it cannot. The People may not do by indirection what they cannot do directly.
I would affirm the judgment.