Opinion
Court of Appeals No. A-12015 No. 6398
11-09-2016
Appearances: J. Adam Bartlett, Attorney at Law, Anchorage, for the Appellant. Lawrence B. Monsma, Assistant District Attorney, Anchorage, and Craig W. Richards, Attorney General, Juneau, for the Appellee.
NOTICE Memorandum decisions of this Court do not create legal precedent. See Alaska Appellate Rule 214(d) and Paragraph 7 of the Guidelines for Publication of Court of Appeals Decisions (Court of Appeals Order No. 3). Accordingly, this memorandum decision may not be cited as binding authority for any proposition of law. Trial Court No. 3AN-12-9169 CR
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appeal from the Superior Court, Third Judicial District, Anchorage, Michael Spaan, Judge. Appearances: J. Adam Bartlett, Attorney at Law, Anchorage, for the Appellant. Lawrence B. Monsma, Assistant District Attorney, Anchorage, and Craig W. Richards, Attorney General, Juneau, for the Appellee. Before: Mannheimer, Chief Judge, Allard, Judge, and Suddock, Superior Court Judge. PER CURIAM.
Sitting by assignment made pursuant to Article IV, Section 16 of the Alaska Constitution and Administrative Rule 24(d).
Ronald Edward Lambert Jr. pleaded guilty to first-degree vehicle theft and failure to stop at the direction of a peace officer after he stole a vehicle and then crashed it twice while attempting to evade a police officer. The plea agreement left the amount of restitution to be determined at a subsequent hearing.
Former AS 11.46.360(a)(1) (2014).
AS 28.35.182(a)(2).
At the hearing, the State requested $9,133.46 in restitution. This amount included: (1) $658.96 to be paid directly to the owner of the vehicle; (2) $8,149.50 to be paid to the victim's insurance company for the replacement value of the totaled vehicle; and (3) $325.00 to be paid to the insurance company to compensate for the victim's rental car fees. In support of this request, the State submitted insurance claims documenting the value of the vehicle and the victim's rental car fees. The State also submitted two police reports describing the circumstances of the incident, as well as photographs of the damage to the vehicle.
Lambert opposed the portion of the request that was to be paid to the insurance company, arguing that the requested amount ($8,474.50 in total) was excessive and unsubstantiated. Lambert also claimed that the court could not rely solely on hearsay evidence to establish the amount of restitution. Superior Court Judge Michael Spaan rejected these arguments and imposed the full amount of restitution requested.
On appeal, Lambert renews his argument that the evidence relied upon by the judge was inadmissible hearsay. But, as the State points out, the hearsay rules do not apply in sentencing proceedings. Judge Spaan thus did not err in concluding that he could consider the State's hearsay evidence when determining the amount of restitution.
Lambert also argues that the evidence lacked reliability and thus was insufficient to establish the amount of restitution. But, in reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting an award of restitution, "we construe the record in the light most favorable to the state and determine whether a reasonable fact-finder could conclude that the disputed amount of restitution was established by a prepon-derance of the evidence." Viewing the evidence in this light, we conclude that there was sufficient evidence to support the judge's ruling.
Noffsinger v. State, 850 P.2d 647, 650 (Alaska App. 1993) (citing Anthony v. State, 521 P.2d 486, 492 (Alaska 1974)). --------
We accordingly AFFIRM the judgment of the superior court.