The Arizona Supreme Court has sided with victims of crimes in a ruling which overturned a state law that limits the amount of restitution. The case at issue concerned the “constitutionality of A.R.S. § 28–672(G), which limits the amount of restitution whenever a defendant is convicted of causing serious physical injury or death by a moving violation.”
The court found that “A.R.S. § 28–672(G) violates § 2.1(A)(8) of the Victim’s Bill of Rights (VBR).
“The statutory cap on restitution in A.R.S. § 28–672(G) diminishes the constitutional right granted in subsection (A)(8), i.e., a victim’s right “[t]o receive prompt restitution from the
person or persons convicted of the criminal conduct that caused the victim’s loss or injury,” argued the Arizona Attorney General’s Office.
In June 2017, the Phoenix Municipal Court found Vivek Patel guilty of violating § 28-672 for causing serious physical injuries to his victim resulting from a failure to yield while turning left. The victim established that his injuries and expenses amounted to $161,191.99. Because Patel’s insurer had already paid $100,000, the amount of restitution for the court to consider was $61,191.99.
A municipal court agreed and ordered Patel to pay $61,191.99.
Patel argued that the court could order no more than $10,000 in restitution due to § 28-672(G).
The superior court reversed the municipal court’s order, according to the Supreme Court. “The court reasoned that, absent the words “full,” “complete,” “for all losses,” or “with no limit” in the text of the VBR, the constitution did not guarantee the right to “full and complete restitution.” Therefore, limiting an award of restitution was a valid policy decision by the legislature.”
The court of appeals reversed the superior court and reinstated the restitution order of $61,191.99. It held that the common understanding of “restitution,” along with the plain language of the VBR and related jurisprudence, necessarily guaranteed victims an award of
restitution for the full amount of their economic loss.