State v. Brasher
Annotate this Case
The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the court of appeals reversing the order of the trial court granting restitution to the victims of Defendant's theft, holding that, although the victims should be compensated for the loss of their stolen vehicle, they did not act to protect their right to restitution when they did not appeal the portion of Defendant's sentence denying restitution.
Defendant pleaded guilty to grand theft of the victims' motor vehicle. The trial court sentenced Defendant to eighteen months in prison. Five months later, the victims filed a complaint for a writ of mandamus seeking an order to compel the trial court to hold a restitution hearing. The court of appeals granted summary judgment in favor of the victims and ordered the trial court to hold a restitution hearing. The trial court held a hearing and entered a restitution order for $1,976.55. The court of appeals concluded that the trial court's supplemental sentencing entry ordering restitution was void because the trial court lost jurisdiction to modify restitution when Defendant was released from prison. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the trial court lost any jurisdiction to modify the sentence when Defendant completed his sentence.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.