In re Interest of Seth C.
307 Neb. 862
Neb.2020Background
- State filed juvenile petition after a road‑rage incident; Seth admitted to an amended charge of "disturbing the peace and quiet of another person."
- Police reports show Seth exited his vehicle and punched the victim multiple times; the victim received same‑day medical treatment.
- Medical bills introduced at disposition showed $3,330.96 outstanding; victim’s mother testified to that balance.
- Juvenile court placed Seth on probation and reserved restitution; at a later restitution hearing the court found restitution appropriate.
- Court concluded full restitution was unrealistic given Seth’s near‑age‑of‑majority status and finances, and ordered $500 restitution.
- Seth appealed, arguing (1) § 43‑286(1)(a) authorizes restitution only for stolen/damaged property, (2) insufficient evidence of causation/amount, and (3) he lacked ability to pay.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Seth) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 43‑286(1)(a) authorizes restitution for victim medical expenses | "Including" in § 43‑286(1)(a) is illustrative; restitution is consistent with juvenile code purposes (reformation/rehabilitation) and § 43‑246 | Statute limits restitution to stolen/damaged property; medical expenses not authorized | Court: "including" is nonexhaustive; restitution for medical expenses is authorized where it serves reformation/rehabilitation |
| Whether evidence supported causation and the restitution amount | Admission, police reports, same‑day medical bills, victim’s testimony and unpaid balance support causation and amount | Medical bills lack injury details; victim impact statement hearsay; causation uncertain (possible injury from concrete median) | Court: Sufficient record support for causation and for ordering $500; hearsay admissible at dispositional hearings and order limited below total billed amount |
| Whether Seth had ability to pay $500 restitution | Court considered Seth’s income, expenses, short probation window, and reduced restitution from $3,330.96 to $500 as reasonable | $500 exceeds what he could afford and would undermine restitution’s rehabilitative purpose | Court: Amount rationally related to proofs and consistent with juvenile’s ability to pay and rehabilitative aims; affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Jedlicka, 305 Neb. 52, 938 N.W.2d 854 (2020) ("include/including" construed as nonexhaustive)
- In re Interest of Laurance S., 274 Neb. 620, 742 N.W.2d 484 (2007) (juvenile courts may use any rational method to fix restitution and must consider ability to pay)
- In re Interest of Veronica H., 272 Neb. 370, 721 N.W.2d 651 (2006) (primary purpose of Juvenile Code is juveniles’ best interests; code to be liberally construed)
- In re Interest of Octavio B., 290 Neb. 589, 861 N.W.2d 415 (2015) (appellate review of juvenile cases is de novo on the record)