Opinion
No. 53886-1-I
Filed: March 21, 2005 UNPUBLISHED OPINION
Appeal from Superior Court of King County. Docket No. 03-1-01504-7. Judgment or order under review. Date filed: 02/03/2004. Judge signing: Hon. Steven C. Gonzalez.
Counsel for Appellant(s), Christopher Gibson Attorney at Law, 1908 E Madison St Seattle, WA 98122.
Counsel for Respondent(s), Shelby Reinholdtsen Smith, King County Prosecutors Office, W554 King County Courthouse, 516 3rd Ave, Seattle, WA 98104-2390.
Robert Douglas was ordered to pay $4,131.88 in restitution for assaulting bus driver Glenn Ruth. Because the evidence presented establishes a causal relationship between the assault and the payments made by Ruth's employer, the order of restitution is affirmed. The assault occurred on June 3, 2003. Douglas got on the bus Ruth was driving, and lay down on the front seats. Ruth told him he was not allowed to do that, and Douglas became extremely agitated. When Ruth asked him to get off the bus, Douglas violently attacked Ruth.
Douglas pled guilty to third degree assault, and received a standard range sentence. At the restitution hearing in February 2004, the State requested that Douglas make restitution to King County's Office of Safety and Claims for Ruth's medical bills and lost wages.
The State presented a payment register listing payments made by King County Safety and Claims on a claim number for Ruth. The 21 payments, totaling $7,204.88, were made over a six month period beginning on July 10, 2003. Most of the money went to Ruth for lost wages a total of $6,073.70. The remaining sum of $1,131.18 was in payments to medical facilities.
The prosecutor said she had talked to the County about the register. `I was able to find out that all of the amounts paid on the check register are based solely on the claim from this one incident. So there's no possibility that anything that happened in the past would be included under this claim number.'
Report of Proceedings (February 3, 2004) at 3.
Douglas responded that the register was insufficient to show causation. It may well be from the same incident, but on the other hand, there could be other injuries than what would have to do with this.
. . . We don't know what caused him to not show up for work.
. . .
. . . To say my client caused all these absences from work without further information as to the specifics — we don't even know how he was injured.
Report of Proceedings (February 3, 2004) at 4, 6.
The trial court ordered $4,131.88 in restitution. This amount represented the total amount due to medical treatment, $1,131.18, and an additional $3,000 for lost wages. The court found the amount reasonable and supported by the information in the certification for determination of probable cause:
According to the certification for determination of probable cause, the victim in this case complained of pain to his ribs and his jaw and that it also looks like the defendant had been spitting blood at him, as well as assaulting him in what was described as a very extremely agitated and violent manner, also including death threats and a threat to return. I think it's reasonable, certainly the medical expenses, of $1,131.18, plus an additional $3,000 in lost wages. Therefore, the total amount of restitution ordered is $4,131.18.
The court does not require a victim to disclose all of his or her medical records. It's sufficient that they allege the injuries were due to the allegation, as long as the allegation contains sufficient violence to have caused such injuries. I will find that standard has been met.
Report of Proceedings (February 3, 2004) at 7-8.
Douglas appeals the order of restitution.
A restitution award will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion. State v. Donahoe, 105 Wn. App. 97, 100, 18 P.3d 618 (2001). An abuse of discretion occurs when the action of the court is `manifestly unreasonable, or exercised on untenable grounds, or for untenable reasons.' Donahoe, 105 Wn. App. at 100.
The State is obligated to establish the amount of restitution by a preponderance of the evidence. State v. Dennis, 101 Wn. App. 223, 226, 6 P.3d 1173 (2000). The amount of restitution ordered by the court must be `based on easily ascertainable damages for injury to or loss of property, actual expenses incurred for treatment for injury to persons, and lost wages resulting from injury.' RCW 9.94A.753(3). Before ordering restitution, the court must find that the victim's injuries were causally connected to the defendant's crime. Dennis, 101 Wn. App. at 227. Evidence is sufficient if it affords a reasonable basis for estimating loss. State v. Dedonado, 99 Wn. App. 251, 256, 991 P.2d 1216 (2000). A causal connection is not established simply because a victim or insurer submits proof of expenditures. `This is because it is often not possible to determine from such documentation whether all the costs incurred were related to the offender's crime.' Dennis, 101 Wn. App. at 227.
A summary of medical treatment that does not indicate why medical services were provided `fails to establish the required causal connection between the victim's medical expenses and the crime committed.' State v. Bunner, 86 Wn. App. 158, 160, 936 P.2d 419 (1997). In Bunner, where the defendant's crime was second degree rape of a child, the sole evidence presented was a medical recovery report by the Department of Social and Health Services listing medical services charged and amounts the State had paid, which included more than $10,000 to Fairfax Hospital. The State conceded, and this court agreed, that this document alone was insufficient to establish a causal connection between the crime and the victim's damages. The State attempted to supply the missing link by reference to a presentence investigation report wherein a caseworker stated that the victim's hospitalization was entirely due to the defendant's sexual contact with her. We rejected this argument because the presentence report was not mentioned or included in the record below.
In State v. Dennis, defendant Dennis was convicted of assaulting two police officers. The court ordered him to pay restitution for the cost of their treatment at a hospital. Dennis objected on the basis of lack of evidence that his offense caused their injuries, and he renewed that challenge on appeal. The evidence included a letter from the Victims Assistance Unit and the Certification of Probable Cause, stating that Officers Dornay and Libby were treated at Northwest Hospital. The letter from the Victims Assistance Unit stated the amount paid on each officer's claim. For Officer Dornay, the State also provided a letter from the Seattle Worker's Compensation Unit claims specialist noting the date of the injury, which was the same day the assault occurred, and attaching a report of payment reflecting an unpaid balance for the amount paid to the hospital on Officer Dornay's behalf. Dennis, 101 Wn. App. at 228. This court found that the State had established the required causal connection only with respect to Officer Dornay. The evidence was insufficient as to Officer Libby, because it established only that he was treated for injuries at the hospital on an unknown date. Dennis, 101 Wn. App. at 228.
Here, unlike in Bunner, the payment register is not the only evidence that the assault by Douglas caused Ruth's injuries. In satisfying its burden, the State can rely upon information that is admitted by the plea agreement or acknowledged and upon evidence presented at the sentencing hearing. RCW 9.94A.530(2). At sentencing, Ruth told the court that Douglas' assault re-injured an old shoulder injury, and that he had to return for yet another medical appointment because of injuries to his ribs and kidneys. Ruth also referred to lost overtime wages while `on LI' because of the assault. The certification for determination of probable cause, which Douglas stipulated contained `real and material facts' for purposes of his sentencing, stated that Douglas `violently punched' the driver all over his body, `causing him a lot of pain' and that Ruth complained of pain to his ribs and jaw because of the assault. This additional evidence provides proof that Ruth incurred injury during the assault for which he had to seek medical treatment.
Report of Proceedings (August 8, 2003) at 5.
Clerk's Papers at 22.
Clerk's Papers at 2.
But was the documentation sufficient to prove that all the costs incurred were related to the offender's crime? Douglas contends that the payment register, like the evidence offered in Dennis as to Officer Libby, does not show that the payments were for injuries incurred during the assault. Unlike in Dennis, where the register showed only that Officer Libby was treated for injuries at the hospital on an unknown date, this register shows a series of payments beginning one month after the date of the assault. All of the payments are related to a single claim number. Based on Ruth's testimony and the payment register showing that payments began a month after the assault, it is a reasonable inference that he sought medical treatment and time loss immediately after the assault, and continued to do so for the next six months.
The evidence was sufficient to establish that the assault by Douglas was the cause of the medical services and time loss payments provided to Ruth, as shown by the register. The order of restitution is affirmed.
BECKER, GROSSE, COX, JJ.