Legal Opinion
State v. A.M.R.
Washington Supreme Court
Decided August 8, 2002No. 71803-2PublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtOwens, J.
— We are asked to decide two questions: may the State appeal restitution orders entered against two juvenile offenders; and, if so, are the crime victims’ insurance companies “victims” entitled to restitution. The Court of Appeals answered both questions in the affirmative, and so do we.
FACTS
A.M.R. pleaded guilty to vehicle prowl in the second degree and making a false statement to a public servant. The State requested the court to order restitution for the damage to the victim’s vehicle. The State sought an award of $493.02, representing out-of-pocket costs to the victim of $100.00 and costs…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Arizona v. ManypennySupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- United States v. SangesSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- State v. DavisonWashington Supreme Court · 1991
- International Ass'n of Fire Fighters, Local 46 v. City of EverettWashington Supreme Court · 2002
- State v. MailWashington Supreme Court · 1993
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- State v. KinnemanWashington Supreme Court · 2005
- State v. KinnemanWashington Supreme Court · 2005
- State v. GriffithWashington Supreme Court · 2008
- Woods v. BailetCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2003
- State v. G.A.H.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2006
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.