Commonwealth v. Morseman
2012 Ky. LEXIS 138
| Ky. | 2012Background
- Fire destroyed Appellee's home on December 13, 2005; Arnica insured the Loss and investigated the fire.
- Arnica's report could not determine origin but ruled out foul play; arson investigators later leaned toward arson.
- Appellee initially lied about rental storage; a storage unit linked to the fire was later found.
- Indictment included Second Degree Arson by Complicity and Fraudulent Insurance Acts by Complicity (over $300).
- Plea agreement (October 11, 2007) mandated restitution to Arnica of $48,597.02 in exchange for dismissal of arson and a five-year probated sentence.
- Restitution hearing showed the amount covered dwelling, contents, and alternate housing/living expenses; trial court ordered full restitution; Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for causal-damage findings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether restitution may include non-causal damages not directly from the charged crime | Morseman argues only losses caused by the fraud should be reimbursed | Morseman asserts statutory causation limits restitution to actual losses from the criminal act | Restitution may include entire agreed amount if the plea establishes the obligation |
| Whether the plea agreement governs the scope of restitution despite statutory causation limits | Morseman maintains the agreement to reimburse all proceeds should not extend beyond the crime | Commonwealth contends the plea agreement spirit includes full restitution as agreed | Plea agreement governs and supports full restitution to Arnica as bargained |
| Whether Kentucky statutes permit enforcement of restitution outside strict causal links when part of a plea | Statutes should strictly limit restitution to damages caused by the crime | Liberal construction of remedial statutes allows broader restitution under a plea | Statutes are liberally construed; plea agreements may order broader restitution when voluntarily entered |
Key Cases Cited
- Ram Eng'g & Constr., Inc. v. Univ. of Louisville, 127 S.W.3d 579 (Ky.2003) (contracts and consideration govern enforceability of plea agreements)
- Commonwealth v. Reyes, 764 S.W.2d 62 (Ky.1989) (offer and acceptance create binding plea agreements with consequences)
- Weatherford v. Commonwealth, 703 S.W.2d 882 (Ky.1986) (plea bargains are important and enforceable components of the criminal justice system)