CHRISTOPHER THOMAS, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT
CANADY, Judge.
Christopher Thomas appeals his convictions for grand theft and burglary, and the State cross-appeals the trial court’s denial of restitution with respect to certain property. We affirm Thomas’s convictions without comment, but we reverse on the issue raised in the State’s cross-appeal.
The State argues that the trial court erred in denying the State’s request for restitution for an unrecovered table saw. The information specifically charged Thomas with theft of the unrecovered table saw along with two other saws that were recovered and returned to the victim. Thomas pleaded guilty to the charge and is therefore responsible for restitution for that item. See § 775.089(1)(a)(1), Fla. Stat. (2003); Chapman v. State, 733 So. 2d 1055, 1056 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). We reverse the trial court’s determination with respect to restitution and remand for further proceedings on the issue of restitution.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
STRINGER and VILLANTI, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Castro, 965 So. 2d 216 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)…he recovered merchandise, which was immediately inventoried by the store’s loss prevention specialist, was damaged in any way on the date in question. These undisputed'facts alone support the trial court’s denial of restitution. See Thomas v. State, 899 So. 2d 1279 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (defendant only liable for restitution for unrecovered items); Chapman v. State, 733 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (defendant not liable for restitution of stolen property found and recovered on defendant’s person upon arrest); B…
Authorities Cited
- Chapman v. State, 733 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)