State v. Anderson

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Civil Law
  • Date Filed: 08-31-2016
  • Case #: A158908
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: DeHoog, J. for the Court; Sercombe, S.J.; & Tookey, J.

ORS 811.706 does not make a distinction between owners and insurers of property damaged in the hit and run for the purposes of ordering restitution payments.

Defendant appealed her conviction for a hit and run. On appeal, Defendant alleged that the trial court erred by awarding restitution in the amount of $5,807.52. Specifically, Defendant argued that ORS 811.706 only allows restitution awards to the owners of the personal property, and that being required to pay the insurance deductible was improper. In her argument, Defendant focused on language that appeared in State v. Hval which seemed to indicate that only owners could recover. However, the Court did not agree with Defendant, because as the Court explained, there was no reason to distinguish an owner from an insurance company for the purposes of allowing restitution.  Affirmed.  

Advanced Search

Back to Top