What is the evidentiary threshold for establishing a right to restitution at a victim restitution hearing?

The evidentiary threshold for establishing a right to restitution is not rigorous: "At a victim restitution hearing, a prima facie case for restitution is made by the People based in part on a victim's testimony on, or other claim or statement of, the amount of his or her economic loss. [Citations.] 'Once the victim has [i.e., the People have] made a prima facie showing of his or her loss, the burden shifts to the defendant to demonstrate that the amount of the loss is other than that claimed by the victim. [Citations.]' [Citation.]" (People v. Millard (2009) 175 Cal.App.4th 7, 26.)

" '[T]he court's discretion in setting the amount of restitution is broad, and it may use any rational method of fixing the amount of restitution as long as it is reasonably calculated to make the victim whole. [Citations.]' [Citations.] 'There is no requirement the restitution order be limited to the exact amount of the loss in which the defendant is actually found culpable, nor is there any requirement the order reflect the amount of damages that might be recoverable in a civil action. [Citation.]' [Citation.]" (People v. Millard, supra, 175 Cal.App.4th at pp. 26-27.) Courts recognize that, in many cases, neither the victim nor the defendant will be able to calculate the victim's losses with any degree of precision, but have noted that "the situation is one of the [defendant's] own making, and as between the victim and the [defendant], the equities favor the victim." (People v. Prosser (2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 682, 691.)