307 P.3d 677
Utah Ct. App.2013Background
- In January 2010 Beckstrom, driving with BAC .228, crossed into oncoming traffic and collided with a vehicle; the husband suffered permanent traumatic brain injury.
- Beckstrom pleaded no contest to third-degree felony DUI (serious bodily injury) while reserving the right to appeal a denied suppression motion; sentencing imposed probation, jail, and a fine, and left restitution open.
- At a later restitution proceeding Beckstrom, on advice of trial counsel, stipulated in open court to "complete restitution" totals of $5,442.24 (Wife) and $92,036.03 (Husband).
- Beckstrom moved to vacate the stipulation before the review hearing; the trial court denied the motion, then set "court-ordered restitution" of $28,800 to be paid $300/month over 96 months.
- Beckstrom appealed, arguing (1) she is not bound by the stipulation because it violated due process and denied opportunity to present comparative negligence evidence, (2) counsel was ineffective in advising the stipulation, and (3) the court abused its discretion in calculating court-ordered restitution.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Beckstrom may challenge the amount of complete restitution on appeal | State: stipulation is binding; parties and court adopted it | Beckstrom: stipulation violated due process and foreclosed proof of comparative negligence | Court: Beckstrom is estopped from challenging complete restitution because she knowingly stipulated and did not timely obtain relief from the trial court |
| Whether counsel rendered ineffective assistance by advising stipulation | State: counsel’s advice was within strategic choices and not deficient | Beckstrom: counsel had no tactical basis and misinterpreted precedent | Court: counsel’s performance was not objectively deficient; multiple reasonable strategies supported stipulation (no ineffective assistance) |
| Whether trial court abused discretion in setting court-ordered restitution amount | State: court considered statutory factors and defendant’s finances | Beckstrom: court failed to adequately weigh burden on defendant and other circumstances (e.g., comparative negligence) | Court: no abuse of discretion; record shows consideration of defendant’s finances, ability to pay, and other factors; amount less than stipulated complete restitution |
| Whether the trial court should have set aside the stipulation for justifiable cause | State: defendant failed to timely and properly appeal denial to vacate; no showing of inadvertence or justifiable cause | Beckstrom: trial court erred in denying motion to vacate stipulation | Court: declined to reach merits because Beckstrom raised this argument first in reply brief and failed to properly preserve/brief the appeal of the denial |
Key Cases Cited
- Prinsburg State Bank v. Abundo, 296 P.3d 709 (Utah 2012) (stipulations are binding and may estop parties; standards for setting aside stipulations)
- State v. Laycock, 214 P.3d 104 (Utah 2009) (restitution: trial court must determine complete and court-ordered restitution; option to resolve facts civilly in some circumstances)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel: deficient performance and prejudice)
- Rivera v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 1 P.3d 539 (Utah 2000) (court reviews enforcement of stipulations for abuse of discretion; hesitancy to relieve parties from negotiated stipulations)