State v. EV
240 Or. App. 298
Or. Ct. App.2010Background
- Juvenile delinquency case alleging acts constituting third-degree sexual abuse, adjudicated by juvenile court.
- State sought restitution to an insurance carrier and the Criminal Injuries Compensation Account for expenses related to counseling of a victim.
- Youth objected, arguing carriers and the account are not victims under juvenile restitution.
- Juvenile court ordered restitution: $761.20 to the insurance carrier and $311.80 to the account.
- Question on appeal: whether these entities qualify as victims for restitution under ORS 419C.450 and related statutory framework.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether insurance carrier and CICA qualify as victims for juvenile restitution. | Youth contends they are not victims under juvenile restitution. | State argues the definition of restitution in ORS 137.103 applies, including carriers and CICA as victims. | Yes; they are victims under the integrated statutory framework. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Gaines, 346 Or. 160, 206 P.3d 1042 (2009) (textual-contextual approach to legislative intent; best evidence is the statute text in context)
- PGE v. Bureau of Labor and Industries, 317 Or. 606, 859 P.2d 1143 (1993) (statutory interpretation using text in context to discern legislature's intent)