State v. Carachuri

“Restitution is to be imposed when ‘a reasonable person in the defendant’s position would have foreseen that some-one in the victim’s position could reasonably incur damages of the same general kind that the victim incurred,’ and such losses resulted from the defendant’s criminal conduct.” State v. Ramos, 358 Or 581, 594 (2016).

Defendant plead guilty to several crimes and was sentenced to probation. Defendant violated his probation, and a supplemental judgment was entered which added more conditions to his probation and required the defendant to pay restitution. Defendant appealed his supplemental judgment, arguing the trial court erred (1) in requiring him to pay restitution for the labor costs associated with repairing the guardrail because no causal link existed and (2) in not announcing all probation conditions on the record. Defendant, relying on State v. Wilson, 193 Or App 506 (2004), argued that the labor costs were not recoverable under any theory of civil liability. The State conceded that the court erred regarding the probation conditions. “Restitution is to be imposed when ‘a reasonable person in the defendant’s position would have foreseen that some-one in the victim’s position could reasonably incur damages of the same general kind that the victim incurred,’ and such losses resulted from the defendant’s criminal conduct.” State v. Ramos, 358 Or 581, 594 (2016). The Court reasoned that because the defendant caused the damage to the county’s guardrail and the county incurred costs to repair the damage, the causal link did exist, and the county was entitled to restitution. Therefore, the trial court did not err in including the labor costs but did err in not announcing all probation conditions on the record. Remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.