How have courts dealt with the issue of insufficient evidence in the context of a restitution order?

Respondent asserts appellant has forfeited any challenge to the restitution order by failing to challenge it below. In support of this assertion respondent cites to People v. Brasure (2008) 42 Cal.4th 1037.

However, as this court explained in In re K. F. (2009) 173 Cal.App.4th 655, "Sufficiency of the evidence has always been viewed as a question necessarily and inherently raised in every contested trial of any issue of fact, and requiring no further steps by the aggrieved party to be preserved for appeal. [Citations.]" (Id. at p. 660.) "Respondent's implicit assertion of a contrary rule appears to rest entirely on People v. Brasure (2008) 42 Cal.4th 1037, 1075 . . . (Brasure). That was a capital murder case in which the court dealt with at least a dozen major contentions before reaching the one relevant here, which was that a restitution order in favor of the victim's mother was ' "inappropriate" because of evidence (not introduced at trial) that [she] had sought a restraining order against her son and because [her] economic loss was not shown by

Page 14