- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Sentencing
- Date Filed: 03-06-2019
- Case #: A164188
- Judge(s)/Court Below: James, J., for the Court; Lagesen, P.J., & Haselton, S.J.
- Full Text Opinion
Defendant appealed from the trial court's entry of a restitution award against him for various sexual assault-related offenses. Defendant assigned error to the trial court’s ruling that he pay restitution to the Child Abuse Response and Evaluation Services ("CARES"). On appeal, Defendant argued that CARES was not a “victim” within any of the definitions of ORS 137.103(4) and thus could not be awarded restitution. In response, the State argued CARES was a victim because it suffered "economic damage" by providing medical services to Defendant's victim without being compensated for part of those expenses. “Restitution is the ‘process to ask the criminal court to award damages that the victim would be able to obtain in a civil action.’” State v. Ramos, 358 Or 581, 368 P3d 446 (2016). The Court of Appeals found that CARES would not be able to recover damages in a civil action because it did not meet the definition of "victim" under ORS 137.103(4) and did not provide any explanation as to why its services should be categorized as "economic damages" under the provision.
Reversed as to the restitution order. Otherwise affirmed.