- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Remedies
- Date Filed: 11-26-2014
- Case #: A150423
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Before Sercombe, P.J., Hadlock, J., & Tookey, J.
Defendant set fires in her restaurant and made an insurance claim for the damaged restaurant equipment, and was subsequently charged with arson, and attempted aggravated theft in connection with the fraudulent insurance claim. The trial court convicted defendant and ordered restitution under ORS 137.106, which allows restitution in criminal cases. Defendant appealed the restitution, arguing that the trial court violated either the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution or Article I, section 17, of the Oregon Constitution, and that the trial court misapplied ORS 137.106. Because defendant did not preserve their constitutional arguments at trial, and purported error is not plain, the Court of Appeals did not address this argument on the merits. Defendant argued that “economic damages” in ORS 137.106 limits damages to those that would be recoverable in a civil action. The Court rejected this argument because the Legislature expanded the scope of ORS 137.103 and ORS 137.106 to entitle victims to restitution for “pecuniary damages,” The Court held that expenses arising out of the insurance company’s investigation of Defendant’s initial fraudulent claim are recoverable in restitution under ORS 137.106. Affirmed.