The court properly exercised its discretion in directing appellant to pay restitution, and by providing that if appellant is unable to make restitution, he may then petition the lower court to rescind the restitution provision. The court's calculation of the amount of restitution was supported by the record, which included a signed victim impact statement specifying the amount the victim paid to replace the stolen property. This evidence was material and relevant, and the...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.