Guinard v. State, 337 P.3d 426

Guinard pleaded guilty to three counts of larceny and agreed to restitution determined by the district court.
The plea agreement required restitution to several victims, including Range Drilling, Mill Creek Metal, Ward’s Iron, Toni and Thomas Coons, and Wind River Casino.
At a restitution hearing, the district court ordered $40,183.30 to Range Drilling, $4,500 to Mill Creek Metals, $2,679.50 to Toni Coons, and $5,000 to Wind River Casino, later reflected in an amended judgment.
Coons’ claim for brass damages totaled $7,179.50; no receipts or itemization supported the $679.50 portion beyond the $2,000 awarded.
Range Drilling presented an itemized loss including missing and damaged items with varying valuation methods; the court relied on bids and replacement/repair costs to determine damages.
On appeal, the court affirmed restitution with two minor recalculations and remanded for an amended order reflecting those corrections.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Did the district court abuse its discretion awarding Range Drilling restitution?	Guinard argues the evidence did not prove the amount for Range Drilling.	Guinard contends the district court miscalculated or overvalued damages.	Yes and no; award affirmed subject to remand for $263 reduction (1,463 vs 1,200) and total adjustment.
Did the district court abuse its discretion awarding Toni Coons $679.50 of her claim?	Coons claimed replacement cost supported by documentation; some amount unsupported.	Guinard argues the entire award is improper due to lack of proof for the additional amount.	Yes; the court properly awarded $2,000 but not the $679.50.
Was the overall restitution order properly based on reasonable evidence of pecuniary damage?	Range Drilling and Coons presented credible evidence; costs derived from bids and testimony.	Guinard contends evidence failed to establish fair market value for certain items.	Partially; sufficient for several items but some damages lacked adequate substantiation.

Morris v. State, 2009 WY 88 (Wy. 2009) (restraints on necessity of credible evidence to support restitution)
Cummings v. State, 2009 WY 130 (Wy. 2009) (burden on State to present credible evidence for restitution)
Smith v. State, 2012 WY 130 (Wy. 2012) (verifiable evidence supporting actual damages justifies restitution)
Glover v. State, 2007 WY 169 (Wy. 2007) (restitution based on victim testimony about damages)
Cross v. Berg Lumber Co., 7 P.3d 922 (Wy. 2000) (measures of value for restitution when items are destroyed or damaged)