Conway v. State

The defendant appeals a restitution order entered after the defendant pled guilty to dealing in stolen property and giving false verification of ownership to a secondhand dealer. He argues the court erred in *1059entering restitution in the amount of $17,812 because that amount was based on inadmissible hearsay and did not reflect the fair market value. We reverse.

At the restitution hearing, the victim testified that she purchased the stolen sterling silverware set in 1948. After the set was stolen, the victim’s son visited pawnshops in the area looking for the silverware. One of the pawnshops had…