State v. Jensen

A criminal defendant is liable in restitution for all the economic damages that “result from” the defendant’s crime. State v. Ramos, 358 Or 581, 587, 368 P3d 446 (2016) (paraphrasing ORS 137.106(1)).

Defendant appealed a supplemental judgment, which held him liable for restitution. Defendant assigned error to the court for allowing the victim to assert a restitution claim and, even if the victim could lawfully assert a restitution claim, for not apportioning liability for the damages among Defendant and his co-defendants. The Court disagreed with Defendant on the first issue because the victim adequately raised the claim for restitution within the 30 day period typically allocated. Next, Defendant argued that, because his conduct did not cause the victim’s most serious injuries and it was also the fault of his co-defendants, the trial court erred in imposing restitution on him for all the damages. The Court rejected these arguments. A criminal defendant is liable in restitution for all the economic damages that “result from” the defendant’s crime. State v. Ramos, 358 Or 581, 587, 368 P3d 446 (2016) (paraphrasing ORS 137.106(1)). At the time of assault, the victim was rendered helpless on the ground and Defendant continued to assault him. Therefore, it was reasonable for the lower court to credit the injury to Defendant and to have reasonably found that Defendant’s acts were the reasonably foreseeable result of the assault. Supplemental judgment affirmed.