Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Theodorou v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided June 30, 2010No. 1090393Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partLyons, Justice

The statutory basis for the trial court’s order requiring restitution provides, in pertinent part, “[A]ll perpetrators of criminal activity or conduct [shall] be required to fully compensate all victims of such conduct or activity for any pecuniary loss, damage or injury as a direct or indirect result thereof.” § 15-18-65, Ala.Code 1975 (emphasis added). Section 15-18-66(4), Ala.Code 1975, defines “victim” as “[a]ny person whom the court determines has suffered a direct or indirect pecuniary damage as a result of the defendant’s criminal activities.” (Emphasis added.)

I concur in the main…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Leonard v. Terminix Intern. Co., LPSupreme Court of Alabama · 2003
  2. United States v. Phillip Wayne BridgesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1974
  3. Ex Parte EversSupreme Court of Alabama · 1983
  4. City of Mobile v. HavardSupreme Court of Alabama · 1972
  5. Strough v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1986

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API