State v. Hatmaker, 2013 Ohio 3202

Hatmaker pled guilty to one count each of leaving the scene of an accident, noncompliance suspension, assured clear distance, and failure to comply with a police order; other charges were nolled.
At restitution, the vehicle owner testified the car was a totaled 1986 Honda Accord with preexisting repair costs around $1,500 and a $250 deductible; insurance paid $3,000 for the total loss.
The owner valued the car at least $3,500 before the accident; the owner had uninsured motors coverage.
The municipal court ordered Hatmaker to pay $1,250 in restitution ($250 deductible plus $1,000 for unrebutted repairs).
Appellant appealed arguing the restitution amount was not supported by credible evidence and was excessive.
The appellate court held the $1,250 award was not supported by competent, credible evidence and reduced it to $500, affirming as modified.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Restitution amount supported by evidence	State contends the amount reflects the victim's loss and evidence supports it.	Hatmaker argues only $250 deductible, and preexisting repair costs were not caused by his offense.	Amount not supported; modified to $500.

In re Hatfield, 2003-Ohio-5404 (4th Dist. Lawrence) (victim's testimony can support restitution)
State v. Policaro, 2007-Ohio-1469 (10th Dist. Franklin) (victim's testimony may constitute competent, credible evidence)
State v. Meyers, 2005-Ohio-4919 (12th Dist. Butler) (restitution evidence must reflect actual loss caused by offense)
Lang, 2011-Ohio-5742 (12th Dist. Brown) (economic loss limited to loss caused by offender's conduct)
State v. Hipsher, 2012-Ohio-3206 (12th Dist. Warren) (amounts for restitution must be proven to a reasonable degree of certainty)
State v. Stamper, 2010-Ohio-1939 (12th Dist. Butler) (restitution must bear reasonable relation to actual loss)