What is the standard of review for a noneconomic damages order?

solely on "the trial court's subjective belief regarding the appropriate compensation," with no "factual and rational basis for the amount ordered." (See also People v. Giordano, supra, 42 Cal.4th at pp. 664-665 ["[W]hile a trial court has broad discretion to choose a method for calculating the amount of restitution, it must employ a method that is rationally designed to determine the surviving victim's economic loss."].)

In People v. Smith, supra, 198 Cal.App.4th at page 436, the court held that the standard of review applicable to economic restitution orders, as set forth above, is not applicable to an order for noneconomic loss. The court explained that "[u]nlike restitution for economic loss, . . . loss for noneconomic loss is subjectively quantified." (Ibid.) The court concluded that trial courts should be guided by the jury instructions applicable in a civil action seeking noneconomic damages and that appellate courts should apply the corresponding standard of review. Under this standard of review, the appellate court will intervene only if the restitution order is so large that it "shocks the conscience and suggests passion, prejudice or corruption." (Ibid.)