State v. Irwin
2016 UT App 144
| Utah Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Defendant Colorado Steven Irwin broke into a Sandy, Utah watch shop and stole 102 Rockwell watches.
- Watches had MSRP totaling $39,004; wholesale value reported as $19,244; a replacement-cost spreadsheet valued them at $13,651.40.
- Insurer calculated loss at $35,155.48 but, due to policy limits, paid the retailer $6,250.48.
- At the restitution hearing the State urged restitution based on retail/MSRP (or insurer valuation); Irwin urged replacement cost.
- Trial court adopted the insurer’s $35,155.48 figure (allocating $6,250.48 to insurer and $28,905 to the retailer).
- The Court of Appeals vacated the restitution order and remanded, holding retail value was not the appropriate measure where the victim— a retailer—could replace inventory at substantially lower wholesale/replacement cost.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Appropriate measure for restitution (retail vs. replacement/wholesale) | Retail value (MSRP) or insurer valuation reflects victim's loss | Replacement cost/wholesale better matches actual pecuniary loss to a retail dealer | Retail value not appropriate; restitution must compensate actual loss—use replacement/wholesale where retailer can replace inventory at lower cost |
Key Cases Cited
- Monson v. Carver, 928 P.2d 1017 (Utah 1996) (restitution limited to compensation for losses caused by defendant)
- Illinois Cent. R.R. v. Crail, 281 U.S. 57 (1930) (wholesale market preferred where replacement can be obtained at wholesale price)
- Winters v. Charles Anthony, Inc., 586 P.2d 453 (Utah 1978) (retail price is prima facie market value for theft elements)
- State v. Brown, 342 P.3d 239 (Utah 2014) (restitution limited to pecuniary damages recoverable in civil action)
- Morris v. State, 334 P.3d 1244 (Alaska Ct. App. 2014) (retail price as prima facie evidence of market value in theft prosecutions)