22 results for 'cat:"Theft" AND cat:"Restitution"'.
J. Segal finds that the district court improperly eliminated or reduced four of eight restitution awards in racketeering claims brought against defendant for fencing stolen vehicles because defendant's sworn affidavits challenging the restitution awards must be sufficiently detailed to inform the state that he intended to challenge the amount of loss for each challenged item, whereupon the state has a duty to present evidence proving the amount of loss. Affirmed in part.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Segal, Filed On: April 8, 2024, Case #: A23-0571, Categories: theft, restitution, Racketeering
J. Rice finds that defendant's conviction for stealing social security cards was based on strong circumstantial evidence of her contemporaneous theft of the victims' credit cards. But a restitution award for the cost of Lifelock subscriptions for the victims was not supported by a close connection to an actual economic loss. Reversed in part.
Court: Montana Supreme Court, Judge: Rice, Filed On: March 19, 2024, Case #: DA 22-0699, Categories: theft, restitution
J. Schutz finds that while the prosecution was expected to have an estimate for restitution prior to defendant's sentencing on theft and property damage charges, its failure to do so did not prejudice defendant because its request was submitted prior to the expiration of the 90-day statutory deadline. Therefore, any error by the prosecution or the trial court for its failure to require an estimate prior to sentencing was harmless and the restitution order is upheld. Affirmed.
Court: Colorado Court Of Appeals, Judge: Schutz, Filed On: February 22, 2024, Case #: 2024COA19, Categories: theft, restitution
J. Greer finds that defendant was properly ordered to pay restitution after entering an Alford plea to theft because she agreed to pay $5,000 in restitution as part of her plea deal and failed to seek to lower the amount. Affirmed.
Court: Iowa Court Of Appeals, Judge: Greer, Filed On: February 21, 2024, Case #: 22-1401, Categories: theft, restitution
J. Sullivan finds the lower court properly convicted defendant of six counts of retail theft for allegedly stealing housewares and other items from a Macy’s store on several occasions, and was sentenced to three to 14 years imprisonment. The lower court also ordered defendant to pay restitution in the amount of $4,568, but did not specify the method in which it was to be repaid. Because of the lack of specificity regarding the restitution, it is vacated and remanded to the lower court for reimposition and clarification. Affirmed in part.
Court: Pennsylvania Superior Court, Judge: Sullivan, Filed On: February 20, 2024, Case #: J-S27043-22 , Categories: Sentencing, theft, restitution
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Christiansen Forster holds that the district court must revisit its $20,000 restitution order to establish if a homeowner's damages resulted from defendant's theft of his possessions. Defendant agreed to pay restitution for the burglary he pleaded guilty to, but he never admitted responsibility for property damages or losses. Vacated.
Court: Utah Court Of Appeals, Judge: Christiansen Forster, Filed On: November 24, 2023, Case #: 20220275-CA, Categories: Burglary, theft, restitution
J. Huskey finds that the trial court relied on sufficient evidence that defendant stole from her employer in ordering her to pay $24,000 in restitution. She may not have collected the cash paid to a codefendant for rooms at the hotel she managed, but she took affirmative steps to hide the theft. Also, she failed to show she was prejudiced by the late disclosure of witness testimony. Affirmed.
Court: Idaho Court Of Appeals, Judge: Huskey, Filed On: November 21, 2023, Case #: 49030, Categories: theft, restitution, Due Process
J. Crothers finds that the district court improperly issued an order and amended a judgment in which defendant claims the restitution ordered by the district court was not directly related to the crime to which he pleaded guilty. Defendant pleaded guilty to unlawful use of personal identifying
information. The district court ordered him to make restitution of $556 for the value of property stolen from the victim’s vehicle. The district court misapplied the law by ordering restitution for the victim’s loss from theft when defendant pleaded guilty to unauthorized use of personal identifying information. Reversed.
Court: North Dakota Supreme Court, Judge: Crothers, Filed On: October 26, 2023, Case #: 2023ND202, Categories: theft, restitution
J. Markman finds the trial court properly levied defendant’s property according to California’s “Freeze and Seize” law aiding restitution enforcement in white collar criminal cases. Though defendant claims the levying order was untimely made eight years after sentencing on his identity theft and money laundering convictions, and that the court lacked jurisdiction due to an improper remand by the appeals court, his “tortured” interpretation of how levying timely relates to sentencing ignores the purpose of the laws. Restitution for victims of crime is a constitutional right. The absence of a disposition formally remanding the original appeal does not bar the levying order. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Markman, Filed On: October 24, 2023, Case #: A162676, Categories: restitution, Property Crimes, Identity theft
J. Bevan finds that the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to strike evidence supporting a restitution order for theft from the motel where he worked. The state's late disclosure that a witness had been found incompetent to stand trial in his own criminal case did not prejudice defendant and the standard for competency for witnesses is lower than the standard to stand trial. Affirmed.
Court: Idaho Supreme Court, Judge: Bevan, Filed On: August 30, 2023, Case #: 49029, Categories: theft, restitution, Witnesses
J. Albrecht finds that the appeal of a defendant's $15,000 restitution amount must be dismissed. While the restitution amount presented by the state lacked supporting evidence, he did not comply with the requirements for negotiated pleas to file a motion to withdraw before the imposition of restitution.
Court: Illinois Appellate Court, Judge: Albrecht, Filed On: August 7, 2023, Case #: 220400, Categories: theft, restitution
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant on his guilty plea to grand larceny as a hate crime in working with others to defraud the elderly. His challenge to the imposed $25,000 in restitution lacked merit because it was not specified in the plea agreement. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: August 3, 2023, Case #: 110299B, Categories: theft, restitution
J. McShan finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant, the former head of a municipal group working to protect Lake George, of grand larceny, scheme to defraud, and offering a false instrument for filing. Trial evidence established that defendant schemed over several years to submit invoices for projects from grants awarded to member municipalities but retained the money by blaming bureaucratic delays. Defendant was properly ordered to pay restitution to various groups and government entities. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: McShan, Filed On: July 27, 2023, Case #: 112140, Categories: theft, restitution
J. Brown finds that the trial court lacked the authority to enter a restitution order following a theft conviction beyond the 90-day statutory deadline.
The trial court was required to make an express good cause finding before the final restitution hearing in order to extend the deadline, and defendant did not waive the right for a timely restitution order or invite error by requesting extensions beyond the deadline. Vacated.
Court: Colorado Court Of Appeals, Judge: Brown, Filed On: July 20, 2023, Case #: 21CA1713, Categories: theft, restitution
J. Irion finds that the trial court properly imposed a $1.1 million restitution order after defendant pleaded guilty to identity theft in a scheme to steal unemployment benefits. A trial court lacks discretion to determine the amount of restitution, which is statutorily based on the victim's economic loss. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Irion, Filed On: July 18, 2023, Case #: D080411, Categories: restitution, Plea, Identity theft
J. Thomas finds that the trial court improperly ruled regarding restitution following defendant's conviction for failure to return leased property because the court failed to base restitution on the fair market value of the equipment. Reversed in part.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Thomas, Filed On: July 12, 2023, Case #: 1D22-1185, Categories: theft, restitution
J. Reynolds Fitzgerald finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant based on his guilty plea to possessing stolen property and imposed $9,800 in restitution. Defendant contends he had not stolen equipment which had been found in his possession, but restitution was permitted given the temporal link between the theft, his possession of the dump trailer, and damage sustained to the trailer. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Reynolds Fitzgerald, Filed On: June 1, 2023, Case #: 112195, Categories: theft, restitution
J. Freyre finds the trial court properly ordered restitution be paid by defendant, who, as a loss prevention officer for Walmart, had access to a key that he used to steal electronics and cash from registers, all of which was caught on surveillance video. The record shows that the restitution information wasn’t available at the time of defendant’s plea, and the court complied with criminal code by accepting that the prosecutor would provide an amount within 91 days of conviction. Affirmed.
Court: Colorado Court Of Appeals, Judge: Freyre, Filed On: May 25, 2023, Case #: 21CA0669, Categories: theft, restitution, Due Process