*2 CAVANAUGH, MONTGOMERY, Before WIEAND and JJ.
WIEAND, Judge:
Ruth Lee Madron was found of theft receiving by stolen property. post-trial pursuant She withdrew motions required plea her also to enter agreement plea to a stolen by receiving theft charge to a second total called for a sentence plea agreement property. twenty- nor more not less than six than imprisonment and fines months, together with restitution’ three hearing, After by the court. to be determined amounts jointly make and sever- ordered Madron to court to one two The restitution ordered co-defendants. ally $25,000; the sum of was in the amount Madron appeal, other.1 direct paid to be On court excessive ordered argues that the restitution income and will from current because residence she owns in order her to sell a compel in this There is merit make restitution to victims. contention; and, affirm *3 sentence. never an order of restitution
This Court has held that from a in an which can be defendant’s must be amount Rather, many in have said that earnings. current instances for a to make substantial necessary
it will be defendant to the victims of his in to make restitution sacrifices order order such requiring not an obstacle to an crimes. This is Rather, necessary, is where sacrifice restitution. consider more care- may learn to probationer parolee or thereby of his or her acts and fully consequences Thus, responsibility. strengthen the offender’s sense or may order additional properly an of restitution expenses, a reduction of employment, alternate in to that order achieve change lifestyle a temporary effective rehabilita- signals sense of responsibility is of restitution well purpose tion. The rehabilitative true is parolee upon called probationer served when a those sacrifices in order make reasonable $33,734.54; (Romanelli) a loss of first had sustained 1. The $27,710.00. (Pennell) had sustained a loss of second victim who have sustained as a losses result of his criminal conduct. The goal only rehabilitative is defeated when ordered by the court are so unreasonable in view of the financial defendant’s circumstances and abili- that, ty to work faith despite good efforts, defendant hope comply.2 Wood, 463, 468, Commonwealth v. 300 Pa.Super. 446 A.2d Where the defendant owns assets in an restitution, amount sufficient to make he or may be called to sell or on the borrow those security of assets proceeds and use the to make rights restitution. The of a victim to made whole not be made subservient criminal’s desire to retain an title to capital unencumbered assets. case,
In instant the record discloses that appel lant is the owner a residential property value whose $60,000, approximately a mortgage of less than $7,500.00.3 suggests This appellant’s financial circum adequate stances are her allow to make restitution for the losses of criminal conduct caused to others. Finding no part abuse of discretion on the court, the sentencing sentence will be affirmed. Affirmed.
CAVANAUGH, J., files a dissenting opinion. *4 CAVANAUGH, Judge, dissenting: I respectfully dissent. I hold that would the restitution order was excessive and remand resentencing directing the court below fashion order not excess of Fifteen ($15,000.00). Thousand Dollars only purpose Rehabilitation of the not the criminal to be served restitution; also serves compensating or aid in victim. unpaid Monthly 3. This balance in 1976. of 193.48 regularly have been made since that time.