State v. Jackson, 2012 Ohio 4235

Patrick Jackson appealed a restitution order issued after his no contest pleas to improper handling of a firearm in a vehicle and vandalism, both fifth degree felonies.
The trial court ordered restitution in the amount of $3,235.00 for damage to the cruiser video system.
The State relied on a pre-sentence investigation (PSI) and a replacement parts price list, but the replacement parts sheet and related evidence were not admitted into the record.
Jackson’s counsel disputed the amount of damage at sentencing, but the court relied on information from the PSI and prosecutor file to set restitution.
There was no witness testimony in the record detailing the extent of damage or cost to repair or replace the video system, and the evidence relied on was not admitted as exhibits.
The appellate court applied Kalish and Rizer standards to determine whether the restitution amount was properly supported, and reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the restitution amount is supported by the record	Jackson contends restitution is not supported by competent evidence.	State maintains the amount is proper based on PSI and filed estimates.	Restitution amount not supported; reversed and remanded

State v. Kalish, 120 Ohio St.3d 23 (2008) (two-step review of felony sentences; amount must bear reasonable relationship to loss)
State v. Rizer, 2011-Ohio-5702 (4th Dist. No. 10CA3) (applies Kalish framework to restitution reviewing for abuse of discretion)
State v. Johnson, 4th Dist. No. 03CA11 (2004) (restitution must be supported by competent, credible evidence)
State v. Sommer, 154 Ohio App.3d 421 (2003) (restitution evidence standard; requires evidentiary support)
State v. Gears, 135 Ohio App.3d 297 (1999) (restitution amount must be supported by record evidence)