Opinion
A169411
03-11-2020
STATE of Oregon, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Miguel Angel REBOLLO ALVARDO, aka Miguel Rebollo, Defendant-Appellant.
Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Sarah Laidlaw, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Michael A. Casper, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.
Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Sarah Laidlaw, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant.
Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Michael A. Casper, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.
Before Ortega, Presiding Judge, and Shorr, Judge, and James, Judge.
PER CURIAM
Defendant challenges the trial court’s award of $3,018.18 in restitution to the victim for damages to her vehicle, arguing that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish that that amount was "reasonable," as required by ORS 137.103(2)(a) and ORS 31.710(2)(a). The state concedes that the trial court erred, and we agree.
In this case, the state presented evidence in support of the restitution award in the form of an estimate of the cost of repairs that the victim had obtained from an auto-body repair shop. In State v. Aguirre-Rodriguez , 301 Or. App. 42, 455 P.3d 997 (2019), we concluded that evidence of a repair-shop estimate and evidence that the victim’s insurer had paid the amount of that estimate did not suffice to establish that the amount sought for the repairs was reasonable. That case is controlling here.
Reversed and remanded.