In Re Joseph L.
251 Ariz. 447
| Ariz. Ct. App. | 2021Background:
- In Feb. 2019, Joseph L. followed a 16‑year‑old into her home bathroom, locked the door, and sexually assaulted her; he later pled to attempted sexual abuse and agreed to pay victims up to $10,000.
- The victim developed PTSD, made multiple suicide attempts, engaged in self‑harm, and had a psychotic episode after police interviewed her.
- The victim’s mother left work to address a psychotic emergency, was fired for the absence, and thereafter remained unemployed for nine months to supervise and protect the victim; hospital discharge sometimes required a safety plan and that the victim not be left alone.
- Mother supported a $9,600 lost‑wages claim with a verified victim statement, a letter from her former employer, and bank statements.
- The juvenile court ordered $9,927.58 in restitution (including $9,600 for Mother’s lost wages); Joseph appealed, arguing those wages were consequential and unrecoverable.
- The appellate court held Mother’s lost wages flowed directly from Joseph’s delinquent conduct and affirmed the restitution award.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Mother may recover lost wages (termination and nine‑month unemployment) as restitution | Mother: lost wages directly resulted from juvenile’s conduct and should be restored | Joseph: the wages are consequential damages from Mother’s choice/termination and thus not recoverable | Court: affirmed—wages were proximately (but‑for) caused by the delinquent conduct and are recoverable restitution |
Key Cases Cited
- In re William L., 211 Ariz. 236 (App. 2005) (restitution should restore victims to their pre‑offense economic position; juvenile court has broad discretion)
- State v. Wilkinson, 202 Ariz. 27 (App. 2002) (requiring that the juvenile’s conduct be the but‑for cause of the economic loss)
- State v. Pearce, 156 Ariz. 287 (App. 1988) (consequential damages are not recoverable when damages do not directly flow from the criminal act)
- State v. Lapan, 249 Ariz. 540 (App. 2020) (upheld restitution for missed work directly tied to victim’s death, investigation, and proceedings)
- In re Stephanie B., 204 Ariz. 466 (App. 2003) (restitution claims must be proven by a preponderance of the evidence)