## Facts

- Husband and wife dissolved their marriage during which husband served as a colonel in the U.S. Army.
- The trial court valued the community portion of husband’s military retirement pension at approximately $117,000 and the community portion of accumulated military leave at approximately $5,115.
- While the dissolution was pending, husband was court-martialed, convicted of a felony, dismissed from the Army, and his retirement-related benefits were forfeited.
- After the forfeiture, the dissolution court assigned the full value of the forfeited pension and leave benefits to husband and awarded wife additional community property equal to one-half of that value to compensate her for the lost community interest.
- Husband appealed the property division.

## Issues

1. Whether a dissolution court may charge a spouse with the value of community military retirement and leave benefits forfeited due to that spouse’s criminal misconduct and compensate the other spouse through an offsetting property award.
2. Whether the forfeiture eliminated the community character of the benefits so as to bar valuation and allocation in the property division.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal affirmed.
- The trial court properly treated the military pension and accrued leave earned during marriage as community property interests subject to valuation.
- The trial court acted within its discretion by allocating the entire economic loss from forfeiture to husband because his misconduct caused the forfeiture.
- The trial court properly offset that allocation by awarding wife additional community property equal to her one-half share of the valued benefits.

## Legal Principles

- Pension rights and employment-related deferred compensation earned during marriage are community property to the extent attributable to marital service.
- When one spouse’s wrongful conduct causes the loss, destruction, or forfeiture of a community asset, the court may allocate that loss to the wrongdoing spouse and adjust the distribution of remaining community property to protect the other spouse’s share.
- A benefit’s forfeiture does not automatically negate the court’s authority to value the community interest and equitably assign the economic consequences of its loss in the property division.

## Conclusion

The court upheld an unequal but equitable allocation of community property where the husband’s criminal misconduct caused forfeiture of community military benefits, permitting the trial court to charge the husband with the loss and compensate the wife through an offsetting award of other community assets.


In re Marriage of Beltran, 183 Cal. App. 3d 292, 227 Cal. Rptr. 924 (Ct. App. 1986)