THERESA GRAHAM, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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.
Theresa Graham appealed the imposition of restitution following her guilty pleas to grand theft and worthless check charges. The court affirmed restitution orders in two cases where restitution was mandatory despite not being mentioned in the plea agreement, but reversed the restitution order in a third case where the victim opposed it and the State failed to prove the amount of loss.
Restitution is mandatory under Florida law since 1984 and defendants are on notice it will be considered in every sentence regardless of whether mentioned in the plea agreement. However, restitution cannot be imposed when the victim objects and the State fails to prove the amount of the victim's loss.
[1] Restitution is mandated by statute and is considered a part of every sentence, regardless of whether it is mentioned in a plea agreement.
[2] A court may not impose restitution when the victim does not desire it and the State fails to meet its burden of proving the amount of the victim's loss.
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Since 1984, when the restitution statute was amended to provide that the court "shall order the defendant to make restitution to the victim," restitution is mandated, and the defendant is on notice that it will be considered as a part of every sentence.”
Establishes that restitution is mandatory regardless of whether mentioned in plea agreement
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGraham pleaded guilty to multiple charges including two counts of grand theft and one count of obtaining property by a worthless check across three se…
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 Amount cases and more on FLexlaw
NORTHCUTT, Judge.
Theresa Graham pleaded guilty to a number of charges, including «two for grand theft1 and one for obtaining property by a worthless check2. At her sentencing hearing, she objected to the court’s imposition of restitution in two of these cases, circuit court case numbers 98-12663 and 98-19222, because payment of restitution was not a part of her plea agreement. On appeal, she raises the same challenge to the restitution imposed in those cases. We affirm. Since 1984, when the restitution statute was amended to provide that the court “shall order the defendant to make restitution to the victim,” restitution is mandated, and the defendant is on notice that it will be considered as a part of every sentence. § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (1997); see Dailey v. State, 575 So. 2d 237 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Gilmore v. State, 479 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). The fact that a defendant’s plea agreement fails to mention restitution does not change this result. See Bunch v. State, 745 So. 2d 400 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999).
We agree with Graham’s argument that the court erred when imposing restitution in the other case, circuit court case number 98-21169. It is clear from the transcript of the hearing that the victim did not want restitution, and that court had decided not to award restitution in that case. In addition, the State did not meet its burden of proving the amount of the victim’s loss. See Winborn v. State, 625 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). We reverse the restitution order in case number 98-21169.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part.
ALTENBERND, A.C.J., and CASANUEVA, J., Concur. . § 812.014(2)(c)1, Fla. Slat. (1997).
. § 832.05(4), Fla. Stat. (1997).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Dailey v. State, 575 So. 2d 237 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)
- Winborn v. State, 625 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)
- McLAIN v. Palm Beach Cnty., 479 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)
- Bunch v. State, 745 So. 2d 400 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)