In People v. Mearns (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 493, defendant pleaded guilty to raping a woman in her mobilehome. The trial court ordered restitution to the victim for the difference between the cost of purchasing a new trailer and the sale price of the mobilehome where the assault took place. (Mearns, supra, 97 Cal.App.4th at p. 496.) Defendant appealed, challenging the restitution order on the ground the victim was not entitled to relocation expenses because she did not move to the new mobilehome in order to avoid further contact with him. This was so, he reasoned, because he was arrested in mid-2000 and she did not move until sometime in 2001. (Id. at p. 502.) The Court of Appeal rejected defendant's argument, noting that defendant knew where the victim lived, and even though defendant was incarcerated, he could have been released from custody. Thus, according to the court, there existed a rational basis for concluding that, in relocating to another mobilehome, the victim did so in material part to relocate away from defendant within the meaning of section 1202.4, subdivision (f)(3)(I): "She moved to prevent defendant from finding her again and reduce the fears engendered by the very mobilehome where she was sexually assaulted at knife point." (Mearns, supra, 97 Cal.App.4th at pp. 502-503.)