K.R., A CHILD
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
K.R. appeals a restitution order imposing joint and several liability with co-defendants for a burglary victim's losses. The First District Court of Appeal reversed the portion awarding lost-wages restitution stemming from an illegal cosmetology practice, while affirming the remainder of the restitution order.
It was error to award restitution for lost wages corresponding to losses from an illegal cosmetology practice. The court reversed the $3,650 in lost-wages restitution while affirming the remainder of the restitution order.
“it was error to award lost-wages restitution to the victim corresponding to the loss of work from an illegal cosmetology practice”
This establishes the core holding: restitution cannot be awarded for income losses from illegal activities.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceK.R. was convicted along with co-defendants in connection with a burglary. The trial court imposed a restitution order holding her jointly and several…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Restitution Order cases and more on FLexlaw
RAY, J.
K.R. appeals a restitution order holding her jointly and severally liable with her co-defendants for restitution to a burglary victim. She raises two issues, only one of which was preserved for appellate review. On the preserved point, it was error to award lost-wages restitution to the victim corresponding to the loss of work from an illegal cosmetology practice. See S.L.L. v. State, 381 So. 3d 1276, 1278 (Fla. 1st DCA 2024) (reversing portion of co-defendant’s restitution order). Accordingly, we reverse the portion of the trial court’s restitution order awarding $3,650 in restitution for lost wages and affirm the order in all other respects.
B.L. THOMAS and KELSEY, JJ., concur. _____________________________