Dana Hanna v. State, 406 S.W.3d 670

Hanna was convicted of driving while intoxicated (DWI).
A trial court ordered Hanna to pay $7,767.88 in restitution to LP&L for repairing a damaged electrical pole.
The pole belonged to Lubbock Power and Light (LP&L).
The charging instrument alleged operating a motor vehicle in a public place while intoxicated; it did not mention the pole or LP&L.
The statute at issue allows restitution to victims of the offense or to the Victims of Crime Fund; the court must determine who is a victim of the offense of conviction.
The court of appeals held LP&L was not a victim of the DWI offense for which Hanna was convicted and reversed the restitution order.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether LP&L is a victim under art. 42.037(a).	Hanna	Hanna argued LP&L not a victim; no injury to a named complainant.	LP&L not a victim; restitution to LP&L reversed.

Cabla v. State, 6 S.W.3d 543 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (restitution limited to victims of the charged offense; intended to be for those alleged and proven to be victims)
Martin v. State, 874 S.W.2d 674 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994) (legislature limited restitution to the victim of the offense; named complainant may not be only victim)
Ex parte Lewis, 892 S.W.2d 4 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994) (restitution limited to the victim of the offense; ancillary entities not recoverable)
Bruni v. State, 669 S.W.2d 829 (Tex. App.–Austin 1984) (where property is jointly owned, multiple victims may be recognized)
Lemos v. State, 27 S.W.3d 42 (Tex. App.–San Antonio 2000) (survivors not victims when offense did not contemplate them as victims)