State v. Shockey, 285 Or. App. 718

Defendant pleaded guilty to unlawful possession of a raptor (dead red-tailed hawk) found in her freezer.
At sentencing the trial court ordered $2,000 restitution to the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) under ORS 137.106.
The state offered no evidence at sentencing of the hawk’s market value or of any $2,000 economic loss to ODFW.
The trial court based the $2,000 award on ORS 496.705, which prescribes statutory damages for unlawful taking/killing of wildlife (ramps raptors to $2,000).
Defendant challenged the restitution order, arguing ORS 496.705 does not supply values for restitution under ORS 137.106.
The Court of Appeals concluded ORS 496.705 does not supply values for ORS 137.106 and remanded for resentencing because no evidentiary support existed for the $2,000 award.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether ORS 496.705 statutory damages establish wildlife values for restitution under ORS 137.106	ORS 496.705 is a legislatively prescribed valuation that suffices to establish economic damages for restitution	ORS 496.705 does not convert statutory damages into the "economic damages" required by ORS 137.106; restitution requires evidentiary proof of losses	ORS 496.705 does not supply values for ORS 137.106; restitution must be supported by evidence

State v. Ferrara, 218 Or App 57 (discusses standard of review for legal questions on appeal)
State v. Ramos, 358 Or 581 (examines scope of recoverable "economic damages" under ORS 137.106)
State v. Harrington, 229 Or App 473 (reversing restitution award where state failed to present evidence of value)
State v. Islam, 359 Or 796 (requiring evidence for restitution claims, rejecting lost-profits restitution absent proof)
Chase and Chase, 354 Or 776 (statutory construction principles: text, context, legislative history)
Diaz v. Coyle, 152 Or App 250 (distinguishing compensatory damages from punitive/statutory damages)