MARTHA GARCIA, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
Martha Garcia appeals her sentencing after being convicted of multiple offenses including burglary, grand theft, and criminal mischief. The court reversed and remanded because the trial court improperly relied on inadmissible hearsay evidence (a body shop estimate) to determine the amount of restitution Garcia owed.
The trial court erred in relying on the hearsay estimate. The State's confession of error and independent appellate review established that value cannot be established solely on hearsay evidence to which a defendant properly objects.
[1] A trial court errs in relying solely on hearsay evidence to establish the value of damaged property for restitution purposes when the hearsay is properly objected to.
[2] Restitution for property damage cannot be established solely on an estimate from a body shop if the estimate constitutes hearsay and is objected to by the defendant.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“At issue in this appeal is whether the trial court erred in relying solely on a hearsay document providing an estimate for the repairs in determining the amount of restitution to be paid by the defendant.”
States the central legal issue in the case regarding admissibility of hearsay evidence in restitution determinations.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGarcia was charged with five counts: burglary of an unoccupied dwelling, grand theft, criminal mischief affecting property valued between $200-$999.99…
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 Determination cases and more on FLexlaw
CONFESSION OF ERROR
The defendant, Martha Garcia (“Garcia”), was charged by Information with five counts: burglary of an unoccupied dwelling; grand theft; criminal mischief affecting property valued between $200 and $999.99; battery; and criminal mischief affecting property valued over $1000. The evidence established that Garcia committed the above offenses with several eode-fendants. After determining Garcia was a minor participant, the trial court withheld adjudication, sentenced her to five years probation, and ordered restitution for the damage. In determining the amount of restitution owed, the trial court relied on an estimate from a body shop over a properly-raised hearsay objection from Garcia’s counsel. At issue in this appeal is whether the trial court erred in relying solely on a hearsay document providing an estimate for the repairs in determining the amount of restitution to be paid by the defendant.
Based on the State’s proper confession of error, and our independent review, we conclude the trial court erred in relying on the estimate. See J.D. v. State, 693 So.2d 146, 146 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (upon confession of error, holding value cannot be established solely on hearsay evidence); J.L. v. State, 684 So.2d 883, 884 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996) (reversing because value was based only on hearsay evidence, to which defendant properly objected); accord Sanchez-Gutierrez v. State, 981 So.2d 632, 632 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (remanding for a new restitution hearing because the value had been established by hearsay evidence that was *1281properly objected to); Louis v. State, 654 So.2d 1290, 1290 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (vacating the portion of the trial court order that was based on hearsay evidence and remanding for a new value determination).
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Reyes v. State, 684 So. 2d 883 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)
- Sanchez-Gutierrez v. State, 981 So. 2d 632 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)
- Breier v. Lennar Homes, Inc., 654 So. 2d 1290 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)
- Ardell Louis v. State, 654 So. 2d 1290 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)
- J.D. v. State, 693 So. 2d 146 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)