State v. Pool

There are three prerequisites to an order of restitution: (1) criminal activities, (2) economic damages, and (3) a causal relationship between the two.” State v. Pumphrey, 266 Or App 729, 733, 338 P3d 819 (2014).

Defendant challenged trial court’s judgment awarding restitution. Defendant argued the trial court erred when it ordered restitution on three items. There are three prerequisites to an order of restitution: (1) criminal activities, (2) economic damages, and (3) a causal relationship between the two.” State v. Pumphrey, 266 Or App 729, 733, 338 P3d 819 (2014). The Court explained that damages do not need to be the direct result of criminal activity. Pumphrey, at 734. Instead, they must be a “but for” cause of the economic damages that the victim incurs and the damages must be reasonably foreseeable from the defendant’s criminal activities. State v. Gerhardt, 360 Or 629, 633, 385 P3d 1049 (2016). The Court concluded that the trial court erred when it ordered restitution for the repair of the surfboard, but did not err on the other two counts. Supplemental judgment imposing restitution reversed in part; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.