Skip to content
Name: Restitution

Appellant was required to pay restitution directly to her victims totaling $60,312.24 for the estimated cost of a fence the victims built themselves “to secure their home after appellant’s criminal conduct caused them to lose their sense of security.” The Court of Appeal agreed with appellant that the trial court’s restitution order provided the victims with a windfall because “there was no evidence of out-of-pocket expenses, no determination of the value of the victims’ time spent building the fence, and no consideration of the value added to their property resulting from the fence’s construction.” The court reversed the restitution order and remanded the matter for a new restitution hearing.