State v. Shepherd
60 A.3d 213
Vt.2012Background
- Defendant pled guilty in July 2010 to aggravated sexual assault, lewd and lascivious conduct with a child, and sexual exploitation of a child; victim was a ten-year-old.
- Defendant is serving a sentence of twenty-five years to life.
- Dispute concerns court-ordered restitution for relocation expenses of the victim’s family.
- Mother has four children, including the victim (Juvenile 1) and his brother (Juvenile 2) with significant health needs; she hired defendant as a live-in nanny.
- Media coverage and victim’s disclosure caused ostracism in a small Vermont town, prompting relocation to Hawaii at a cost of $15,887.78.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct link between crime and relocation | State argues crime caused ostracism necessitating relocation. | Defendant contends no direct link; relocation may have intervening causes. | Court upheld direct link; relocation tied to crime and resulting ostracism. |
| Reasonableness of Hawaii relocation | Hawaii chosen to provide support and resources for Juvenile 2. | Location choice is not necessary to remedy the loss caused by the crime. | Relocation to Hawaii deemed reasonable given family needs and resources. |
| Relocation costs as material loss under 7043 | Costs are uninsured out-of-pocket losses linked to the crime. | Costs are emotional damages not recoverable as restitution. | Costs deemed material losses directly linked to the crime; permissible under 13 V.S.A. § 7043. |
| Scope of restitution and | Relocation costs should be recoverable; counselor-stated needs support. | Restitution should not create ‘new starts’ or substitute civil damages. | Court affirmed discretion to award relocation costs; not an improper recovery. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. LaFlam, 184 Vt. 629 (2008 VT 108) (direct link and proximate-causation required for restitution)
- State v. Tetrault, 54 A.3d 146 (2012 VT 51) (abuse-of-discretion standard for restitution)
- State v. Kenvin, 38 A.3d 26 (2011 VT 123) (restitution reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- State v. Forant, 719 A.2d 399 (1998 VT 101) (restitution narrowly drawn; emotional damages not recoverable)
- State v. Jarvis, 509 A.2d 1005 (1986 VT 18) (only liquidated, easily ascertainable damages recoverable)