State v. C. A. M.-D.

Restitution is appropriate when the state presents evidence that the criminal activities have caused economic damages. State v. McClelland, 278 Or App 138, 141, 372 P3d 614, rev den, 360 Or 423 (2016). A causal connection requires that the defendant’s criminal conduct be a “but for” cause of the victim’s damages and that the damages were a reasonably foreseeable result of the defendant’s criminal conduct. State v. Emerine, 308 Or App 211, 216-17, 480 P3d 308 (2020).

Youth appealed a supplemental judgment that followed admission of criminal conduct. Youth assigned error to the juvenile court and argued that there was insufficient evidence to support restitution for the victim’s medical expenses. Restitution is appropriate when the state presents evidence that the criminal activities have caused economic damages. State v. McClelland, 278 Or App 138, 141, 372 P3d 614, rev den, 360 Or 423 (2016). A causal connection requires that the defendant’s criminal conduct be a “but for” cause of the victim’s damages and that the damages were a reasonably foreseeable result of the defendant’s criminal conduct. State v. Emerine, 308 Or App 211, 216-17, 480 P3d 308 (2020). Here, Youth admitted in his plea that he caused injury to the victim. Additionally, the Court reasoned there was sufficient evidence to show that the victim was transported by ambulance to a hospital, where medical expenses were incurred.  Thus, the Court held that restitution was appropriate. Affirmed.