State v. Pumphrey

Under ORS 137.106, a Defendant must pay restitution for economic damages incurred by violating a stalking protective order so long as there is a “but for” causal relationship between the criminal activity and the resulting the economic damages.

In 2010, the victim obtained the stalking protective order prohibiting Defendant from contacting, coming into visual presence of, or waiting outside work for the victim. In 2012, Defendant breached the SPO. Nearly a week later, the victim sought medical attention for “massive panic attacks” resulting in multiple physician visits and medicating treatment. The victim missed work for the doctor’s appointments; attended group therapy and counseling; obtained police reports from other jurisdictions; rented a temporary residence; changed her phone number; and changed the locks on her front door. Defendant appealed a judgment requiring payment of $2,674.76 in restitution for victim’s economic damages resulting from Defendant’s two convicted counts of violation of a SPO. Defendant argued that there was insufficient evidence to show that the five items of restitution were “economic damages.” The trial court held that all of these expenditures were incurred as a result of Defendant’s violation of the SPO. Defendant argued on appeal that there was no direct connection between the expenditures and the harm. The Court found that all of the economic damages resulted from the Defendant’s criminal activities, stemming from the victim’s state of fear induced by Defendant’s violation of the SPO. Affirmed.