State v. Cottrell
152 Idaho 387
| Idaho Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Cottrell pled guilty to obstructing an officer during an arrest on December 12, 2008.
- The State sought restitution for Officer Sullivan’s knee injury related to the arrest.
- The magistrate awarded ISIF $24,921.47 for injuries incurred on the arrest date.
- Magistrate noted some evidence was not supported and excluded over $6,000.
- Probation was amended to require $250 monthly restitution payments by Cottrell.
- District court affirmed restitution and ordered $1,000 reimbursement for appointed counsel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Causation between conduct and injury | Cottrell argues no causal link; preexisting knee present | Cottrell argues lack of direct causation; preexisting condition could be sole cause | There is substantial evidence of causation |
| Restitution as punitive or remedial | Restitution may function as punishment | Restitution is remedial; not punishment | Restitution is remedial and compensatory; Eighth/Idaho Excessive Fines Clause not applicable |
| Amount of restitution reasonable | Award reflects victim's economic loss due to offense | Amount excessive given resources/insurance | Award reasonable; insurer benefits permissible; no abuse of discretion |
| Effect of defendant's indigency on restitution | Indigency should bar or limit restitution | Future earning capacity can justify restitution despite current ability | Court properly considered future earning capacity; no abuse |
| Counsel-reimbursement order appropriate | Reimbursement of appointed counsel appropriate | Unjust given restitution issues | Reimbursement of $1,000 approved; within discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Shafer, 144 Idaho 370 (Ct.App.2007) (causation requirement for restitution; leaving scene case cited for nexus)
- State v. Corbus, 150 Idaho 599 (2011) (causation two-part: actual and proximate; foreseeability standard)
- State v. Taie, 138 Idaho 878 (Ct.App.2003) (insurer benefits; restitution to insurer allowed; evidence sufficiency)
- State v. Bybee, 115 Idaho 541 (Ct.App.1989) (future earning capacity can support restitution; probation terms)
- State v. Richmond, 137 Idaho 35 (Ct.App.2002) (full compensation policy; discretion in restitution factors)
- State v. Hudson, 147 Idaho 335 (Ct.App.2009) (standards for reviewing district court discretion in restitution)