State v. Futrell

I disagree with one part of the majority opinion, so I write separately to explain that disagreement. To refresh the reader’s memory, Futrell was convicted of residential burglary and is challenging the district court’s restitution order, which required him to pay a total of $7,953.41 based on five losses tire State claimed had been caused *283by his crimes: (1) $303.41 for damage to Platts car; (2) $6,220 for cash stolen from Platts car; (3) $250 for damage to the door of Platts home; (4) $680 for cash stolen from Platts home; and (5) $500 for damage to Futrelfs ex-girlfriends phone. I concur…