California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Young, B271589 (Cal. App. 2018):
"[I]t is the discovery of the crime, and not just a loss, that triggers the running of the statute. '[D]iscovery of a loss, without discovery of a criminal agency, is not enough.' [Citation.]" (People v. Lopez (1997) 52 Cal.App.4th 233, 246, fn. 4 (Lopez).) In People v. Crossman (1989) 210 Cal.App.3d 476, the court cited analogous sister-state authority for the proposition that discovery had not occurred where knowledge of facts " 'would have only created a suspicion of wrongdoing.' " (Id. at p. 481, italics added.) Similar principles apply where, as here, the issue is whether a crime should have been discovered.
Page 16
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.