In what circumstances will a defendant not be able to challenge an order requiring him to pay restitution directly to the victim?

In People v. Ryan, supra, 203 Cal.App.3d 189, 249 Cal.Rptr. 750, the defendant was ordered to pay restitution directly to a victim as a condition of probation. On appeal he was precluded from challenging the order on grounds there was no evidence or finding of his ability to pay. The reasons for the appellate ruling were that the defendant's counsel expressly told the sentencing court the defendant was ready to make full restitution to the victim, that he disputed only a small portion of the total claimed by the victim, and that he would comply with the conditions of probation. Ryan stands for the proposition that when a defendant in effect concedes he has the ability to pay restitution and is not denied the opportunity to present evidence, he may not challenge the order on appeal. (Id. at pp. 198-199, 249 Cal.Rptr. 750.) In our case respondent does not point us to any statement made by appellant or his

Page 193