Lacee M. Garber, n/k/a Lacee M. Cochran v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.), 34A02-1609-CR-2039

Garber worked (2005–2013) as a paralegal/office manager for attorney Michael Krebes and had access to firm and client trust accounts.
Garber diverted client retainers and settlement funds, concealed disciplinary complaints, and used firm accounts for personal expenditures; two victims named were Delores Pendergrass and Thomas Melton.
Krebes discovered extensive misconduct in late 2013, suffered disciplinary consequences and civil exposure, and valued his loss at $123,818.45.
Garber pleaded guilty pursuant to a written plea agreement to two counts of Class C felony forgery and one count of Class D felony theft; the parties disagreed on restitution amount and left calculation to the trial court.
At sentencing the court ordered $100,000 restitution: $20,200 as a probation condition and $79,800 as a civil judgment; Garber appealed only the restitution amount.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Garber waived appellate review of the restitution amount by agreeing to leave calculation to the trial court	State: Garber waived review because she expressly left amount to court discretion	Garber: Amount is excessive and should be reduced	Court: Garber waived the right to challenge by affirmatively leaving calculation to the court; even on the merits, $100,000 was within discretion

Bell v. State, 59 N.E.3d 959 (Ind. 2016) (appellate review of restitution orders and discussion of waiver and sentencing review)
Kays v. State, 963 N.E.2d 507 (Ind. 2012) (restitution lies within trial court's sentencing discretion)
Ryan v. Janovsky, 999 N.E.2d 895 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (waiver is an affirmative act; silence does not necessarily constitute waiver)
Pohle v. Cheatham, 724 N.E.2d 655 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000) (discussing principles of waiver)