Florida Statute 775.89 - Full Text and Legal Analysis

The 2024 Florida Statutes (including 2025 Special Session C)

Title XLVI
CRIMES

Chapter 775
GENERAL PENALTIES; REGISTRATION OF CRIMINALS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 775.089

775.089 Restitution.—

(1)(a) In addition to any punishment, the court shall order the defendant to make restitution to the victim for:

1. Damage or loss caused directly or indirectly by the defendant’s offense; and

2. Damage or loss related to the defendant’s criminal episode,

unless it finds clear and compelling reasons not to order such restitution. Restitution may be monetary or nonmonetary restitution. The court shall make the payment of restitution a condition of probation in accordance with s. 948.03. An order requiring the defendant to make restitution to a victim does not remove or diminish the requirement that the court order payment to the Crimes Compensation Trust Fund pursuant to chapter 960. Payment of an award by the Crimes Compensation Trust Fund shall create an order of restitution to the Crimes Compensation Trust Fund, unless specifically waived in accordance with subparagraph (b)1.

(b)1. If the court does not order restitution, or orders restitution of only a portion of the damages, as provided in this section, it shall state on the record in detail the reasons therefor.

2. An order of restitution entered as part of a plea agreement is as definitive and binding as any other order of restitution, and a statement to such effect must be made part of the plea agreement. A plea agreement may contain provisions that order restitution relating to criminal offenses committed by the defendant to which the defendant did not specifically enter a plea.

1. Each person who suffers property damage or loss, monetary expense, or physical injury or death as a direct or indirect result of the defendant’s offense or criminal episode, and also includes the victim’s estate if the victim is deceased, and the victim’s next of kin if the victim is deceased as a result of the offense. The term includes governmental entities and political subdivisions, as those terms are defined in s. 11.45, when such entities are a direct victim of the defendant’s offense or criminal episode and not merely providing public services in response to the offense or criminal episode.

2. The term also includes the victim’s trade association if the offense is a violation of s. 540.11(3)(a)3. involving the sale, or possession for purposes of sale, of physical articles and the victim has granted the trade association written authorization to represent the victim’s interests in criminal legal proceedings and to collect restitution on the victim’s behalf. The restitution obligation in this subparagraph relating to violations of s. 540.11(3)(a)3. applies only to physical articles and does not apply to electronic articles or digital files that are distributed or made available online. As used in this subparagraph, the term “trade association” means an organization founded and funded by businesses that operate in a specific industry to protect their collective interests.

(2)(a) When an offense has resulted in bodily injury to a victim, a restitution order entered under subsection (1) shall require that the defendant:

1. Pay the cost of necessary medical and related professional services and devices relating to physical, psychiatric, and psychological care, including nonmedical care and treatment rendered in accordance with a recognized method of healing.

2. Pay the cost of necessary physical and occupational therapy and rehabilitation.

3. Reimburse the victim for income lost by the victim as a result of the offense.

4. In the case of an offense which resulted in bodily injury that also resulted in the death of a victim, pay an amount equal to the cost of necessary funeral and related services.

(b) When an offense has not resulted in bodily injury to a victim, a restitution order entered under subsection (1) may require that the defendant reimburse the victim for income lost by the victim as a result of the offense.

(3)(a) The court may require that the defendant make restitution under this section within a specified period or in specified installments.

(b) The end of such period or the last such installment shall not be later than:

1. The end of the period of probation if probation is ordered;

2. Five years after the end of the term of imprisonment imposed if the court does not order probation; or

3. Five years after the date of sentencing in any other case.

(c) Notwithstanding this subsection, a court that has ordered restitution for a misdemeanor offense shall retain jurisdiction for the purpose of enforcing the restitution order for any period, not to exceed 5 years, that is pronounced by the court at the time restitution is ordered.

(d) If not otherwise provided by the court under this subsection, restitution must be made immediately.

If the restitution ordered by the court is not made within the time period specified, the court may continue the restitution order through the duration of the civil judgment provision set forth in subsection (5) and as provided in s. 55.10.

(4) If a defendant is placed on probation or paroled, complete satisfaction of any restitution ordered under this section shall be a condition of such probation or parole. The court may revoke probation, and the Florida Commission on Offender Review may revoke parole, if the defendant fails to comply with such order.

(5) An order of restitution may be enforced by the state, or by a victim named in the order to receive the restitution, in the same manner as a judgment in a civil action. The outstanding unpaid amount of the order of restitution bears interest in accordance with s. 55.03, and, when properly recorded, becomes a lien on real estate owned by the defendant. If civil enforcement is necessary, the defendant shall be liable for costs and attorney’s fees incurred by the victim in enforcing the order.

(6)(a) The court, in determining whether to order restitution and the amount of such restitution, shall consider the amount of the loss sustained by any victim as a result of the offense.

(b) The criminal court, at the time of enforcement of the restitution order, shall consider the financial resources of the defendant, the present and potential future financial needs and earning ability of the defendant and his or her dependents, and such other factors which it deems appropriate.

(7)(a) While the primary purpose of restitution is to compensate the victim, it also serves the rehabilitative and deterrent goals of the criminal justice system.

(b) Restitution must be determined on a fair market value basis unless the state, victim, or defendant shows that using another basis, including, but not limited to, replacement cost, purchase price less depreciation, or actual cost of repair, is equitable and better furthers the purposes of restitution.

(c) Any dispute as to the proper amount or type of restitution shall be resolved by the court by the preponderance of the evidence. The court may consider hearsay evidence for this purpose, provided it finds that the hearsay evidence has a minimal indicia of reliability. The burden of demonstrating the amount of the loss sustained by a victim as a result of the offense is on the state attorney. The burden of demonstrating the present financial resources and the absence of potential future financial resources of the defendant and the financial needs of the defendant and his or her dependents is on the defendant. The burden of demonstrating such other matters as the court deems appropriate is upon the party designated by the court as justice requires.

(8) The conviction of a defendant for an offense involving the act giving rise to restitution under this section shall estop the defendant from denying the essential allegations of that offense in any subsequent civil proceeding. An order of restitution hereunder will not bar any subsequent civil remedy or recovery, but the amount of such restitution shall be set off against any subsequent independent civil recovery.

(9) When a corporation or unincorporated association is ordered to make restitution, the person authorized to make disbursements from the assets of such corporation or association shall pay restitution from such assets, and such person may be held in contempt for failure to make such restitution.

(10)(a) Any default in payment of restitution may be collected by any means authorized by law for enforcement of a judgment.

(b) The restitution obligation is not subject to discharge in bankruptcy, whether voluntary or involuntary, or to any other statutory or common-law proceeding for relief against creditors.

(11)(a) The court may order the clerk of the court to collect and dispense restitution payments in any case.

(b) The court may order the Department of Corrections to collect and dispense restitution and other payments from persons remanded to its custody or supervision.

(12)(a) Issuance of income deduction order with an order for restitution.—

1. Upon the entry of an order for restitution, the court shall enter a separate order for income deduction if one has not been entered.

2. The income deduction order shall direct a payor to deduct from all income due and payable to the defendant the amount required by the court to meet the defendant’s obligation.

3. The income deduction order shall be effective so long as the order for restitution upon which it is based is effective or until further order of the court.

4. When the court orders the income deduction, the court shall furnish to the defendant a statement of his or her rights, remedies, and duties in regard to the income deduction order. The statement shall state:

a. All fees or interest which shall be imposed.

b. The total amount of income to be deducted for each pay period.

c. That the income deduction order applies to current and subsequent payors and periods of employment.

d. That a copy of the income deduction order will be served on the defendant’s payor or payors.

e. That enforcement of the income deduction order may only be contested on the ground of mistake of fact regarding the amount of restitution owed.

f. That the defendant is required to notify the clerk of court within 7 days after changes in the defendant’s address, payors, and the addresses of his or her payors.

(b) Enforcement of income deduction orders.—

1. The clerk of court or probation officer shall serve an income deduction order and the notice to payor on the defendant’s payor unless the defendant has applied for a hearing to contest the enforcement of the income deduction order.

2.a. Service by or upon any person who is a party to a proceeding under this subsection shall be made in the manner prescribed in the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure for service upon parties.

b. Service upon the defendant’s payor or successor payor under this subsection shall be made by prepaid certified mail, return receipt requested, or in the manner prescribed in chapter 48.

3. The defendant, within 15 days after having an income deduction order entered against him or her, may apply for a hearing to contest the enforcement of the income deduction order on the ground of mistake of fact regarding the amount of restitution owed. The timely request for a hearing shall stay the service of an income deduction order on all payors of the defendant until a hearing is held and a determination is made as to whether the enforcement of the income deduction order is proper.

4. The notice to payor shall contain only information necessary for the payor to comply with the income deduction order. The notice shall:

a. Require the payor to deduct from the defendant’s income the amount specified in the income deduction order and to pay that amount to the clerk of court.

b. Instruct the payor to implement the income deduction order no later than the first payment date which occurs more than 14 days after the date the income deduction order was served on the payor.

c. Instruct the payor to forward within 2 days after each payment date to the clerk of court the amount deducted from the defendant’s income and a statement as to whether the amount totally or partially satisfies the periodic amount specified in the income deduction order.

d. Specify that, if a payor fails to deduct the proper amount from the defendant’s income, the payor is liable for the amount the payor should have deducted plus costs, interest, and reasonable attorney’s fees.

e. Provide that the payor may collect up to $5 against the defendant’s income to reimburse the payor for administrative costs for the first income deduction and up to $2 for each deduction thereafter.

f. State that the income deduction order and the notice to payor are binding on the payor until further notice by the court or until the payor no longer provides income to the defendant.

g. Instruct the payor that, when he or she no longer provides income to the defendant, the payor shall notify the clerk of court and shall also provide the defendant’s last known address and the name and address of the defendant’s new payor, if known, and that, if the payor violates this provision, the payor is subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $250 for the first violation or $500 for any subsequent violation.

h. State that the payor shall not discharge, refuse to employ, or take disciplinary action against the defendant because of an income deduction order and shall state that a violation of this provision subjects the payor to a civil penalty not to exceed $250 for the first violation or $500 for any subsequent violation.

i. Inform the payor that, when he or she receives income deduction orders requiring that the income of two or more defendants be deducted and sent to the same clerk of court, the payor may combine the amounts that are to be paid to the depository in a single payment as long as he or she identifies that portion of the payment attributable to each defendant.

j. Inform the payor that if the payor receives more than one income deduction order against the same defendant, he or she shall contact the court for further instructions.

5. The clerk of court shall enforce income deduction orders against the defendant’s successor payor who is located in this state in the same manner prescribed in this subsection for the enforcement of an income deduction order against an original payor.

6. A person may not discharge, refuse to employ, or take disciplinary action against an employee because of the enforcement of an income deduction order. An employer who violates this provision is subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $250 for the first violation or $500 for any subsequent violation.

7. When a payor no longer provides income to a defendant, the payor shall notify the clerk of court and shall provide the defendant’s last known address and the name and address of the defendant’s new payor, if known. A payor who violates this provision is subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $250 for the first violation or $500 for a subsequent violation.

History.—s. 1, ch. 77-150; s. 288, ch. 79-400; s. 5, ch. 84-363; s. 2, ch. 88-96; s. 38, ch. 88-122; s. 10, ch. 89-526; s. 2, ch. 92-107; s. 1, ch. 93-37; s. 3, ch. 93-69; s. 19, ch. 94-342; s. 1, ch. 95-160; s. 1187, ch. 97-102; s. 1, ch. 99-358; s. 1, ch. 2012-17; s. 13, ch. 2014-191; s. 1, ch. 2015-132; s. 1, ch. 2021-172.

F.S. 775.089 on Google Scholar

F.S. 775.089 on CourtListener

Amendments to 775.089

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 775.089

Total Results: 572

Banks v. State

732 So. 2d 1065, 1999 WL 215372

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 15, 1999 | Docket: 460511

Cited 155 times | Published

view adopted by the trial court."). [10] Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1997), provides in relevant

Reyes v. State

655 So. 2d 111, 1995 WL 65502

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 15, 1995 | Docket: 457341

Cited 105 times | Published

to collect and dispense restitution payments. § 775.089(11), Fla. Stat. (1991). [4] For example, the

State v. Hawthorne

573 So. 2d 330, 1991 WL 1360

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jan 3, 1991 | Docket: 2506434

Cited 75 times | Published

to be included in a restitution order under section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1987).[1] We have jurisdiction

Glaubius v. State

688 So. 2d 913, 1997 WL 67973

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Feb 20, 1997 | Docket: 1508295

Cited 59 times | Published

a proper item for restitution pursuant to section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1993), because those

State v. Williams

520 So. 2d 276, 1988 WL 15149

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Feb 25, 1988 | Docket: 1709287

Cited 50 times | Published

court's restitution order is controlled by section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1985). That statute

A.J. v. State

677 So. 2d 935, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 7828

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 24, 1996 | Docket: 64766478

Cited 47 times | Published

of [appellant’s] offense or criminal episode.” § 775.089(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (1995). The victim’s mother’s

Stogniew v. McQueen

656 So. 2d 917, 1995 WL 256203

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 4, 1995 | Docket: 387494

Cited 46 times | Published

318 N.C. 421, 349 S.E.2d 552 (1986). [3] Section 775.089(8) provides: The conviction of a defendant

Starr Tyme, Inc. v. Cohen

659 So. 2d 1064, 20 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 447, 1995 Fla. LEXIS 1417, 1995 WL 511416

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Aug 31, 1995 | Docket: 2484834

Cited 39 times | Published

the amount already recovered in restitution. See § 775.89(8) (restitution order will not bar subsequent

Del Valle v. State

80 So. 3d 999, 36 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 732, 2011 Fla. LEXIS 2878, 2011 WL 6220783

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 15, 2011 | Docket: 1935006

Cited 33 times | Published

clear and compelling reasons not to do so. See § 775.089, Fla. Stat. (2011). In the trial court’s determination

Carney v. State

458 So. 2d 13

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 9, 1984 | Docket: 1452991

Cited 31 times | Published

restitution in the case at bar, in conformity with Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1983), after notice to appellant

Spivey v. State

531 So. 2d 965, 1988 WL 103831

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 6, 1988 | Docket: 242284

Cited 29 times | Published

in determining the amount of restitution. Section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1985), states in pertinent

Neal v. State

688 So. 2d 392, 1997 WL 49152

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 10, 1997 | Docket: 1272752

Cited 28 times | Published

objection regarding the amount. We agree. Section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (1995), unambiguously

United States v. Satterfield

743 F.2d 827, 53 U.S.L.W. 2212

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Oct 3, 1984 | Docket: 66200363

Cited 26 times | Published

the restitution order. See, e.g., Fla.Stat.Ann. § 775.089(6) (West Supp.1983); Ga.Code Ann. § 17-14-13 (Michie

Exposito v. State

891 So. 2d 525, 2004 WL 2973860

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 23, 2004 | Docket: 1704373

Cited 24 times | Published

appeal "an order denying restitution under section 775.089." See ch. 93-37, § 14, Laws of Fla. Most recently

AJ v. State

677 So. 2d 935, 1996 WL 410696

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 24, 1996 | Docket: 1689898

Cited 21 times | Published

of [appellant's] offense or criminal episode." § 775.089(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (1995). The victim's mother's

Schuette v. State

822 So. 2d 1275, 2002 WL 1338512

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jun 20, 2002 | Docket: 1698646

Cited 20 times | Published

loss. Until 1993, the restitution statute, section 775.089, provided in pertinent part: (1)(a) In addition

Kirby v. State

863 So. 2d 238, 2003 WL 22304524

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 9, 2003 | Docket: 1728596

Cited 19 times | Published

trial court's authority to order restitution. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2002),[5] states in relevant

State v. Keirn

720 So. 2d 1085, 1998 WL 219729

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 6, 1998 | Docket: 308401

Cited 18 times | Published

DCA 1990), the fifth district interpreted section 775.089(8), Florida Statutes (1989), which provided

Mansingh v. State

588 So. 2d 636, 1991 WL 215048

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 21, 1991 | Docket: 1708319

Cited 18 times | Published

burden to show the amount of loss sustained. § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (Supp. 1988). A trial court is

State v. Tyrrell

807 So. 2d 122, 2002 WL 91297

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 25, 2002 | Docket: 1750595

Cited 17 times | Published

780 So.2d 269, 270 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). [7] Section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes, defines restitution

Ballance v. State

447 So. 2d 974

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 16, 1984 | Docket: 1312175

Cited 17 times | Published

to be determined by the court. Similarly, Section 775.089(1), Florida Statutes (1981), provides: (1)

JOS v. State

689 So. 2d 1061, 1997 WL 109215

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 13, 1997 | Docket: 1477238

Cited 16 times | Published

which a court may do in its discretion.[5] Section 775.089 is a restitution statute which is part of Florida's

Koile v. State

902 So. 2d 822, 2005 WL 171454

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 7, 2005 | Docket: 1674992

Cited 15 times | Published

proved by a preponderance of the evidence. See § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2001); Santana v. State, 795 So

Iaconetti v. State

869 So. 2d 695, 2004 WL 690570

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 2, 2004 | Docket: 1654002

Cited 15 times | Published

the proper amount of restitution. We agree. Section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (2002), requires the trial

Sims v. State

998 So. 2d 494, 2008 WL 4354880

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 25, 2008 | Docket: 2527438

Cited 14 times | Published

underlying crime. See id. at 1284. We reasoned that section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2001), which states

Rodriguez v. State

964 So. 2d 833, 2007 WL 2713537

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 19, 2007 | Docket: 833730

Cited 14 times | Published

of his medical treatment was proper under section 775.089(1)(a)(1), Florida Statutes (2003) (stating

Rodriguez v. State

964 So. 2d 833, 2007 WL 2713537

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 19, 2007 | Docket: 833730

Cited 14 times | Published

of his medical treatment was proper under section 775.089(1)(a)(1), Florida Statutes (2003) (stating

Hamrick v. State

648 So. 2d 274, 1995 WL 1640

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 4, 1995 | Docket: 31775

Cited 14 times | Published

victim and appellant's ability to pay restitution. § 775.089(6), Fla. Stat. (1993). See also Strickland v.

LAD v. State

616 So. 2d 106, 1993 WL 77421

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 22, 1993 | Docket: 1368049

Cited 14 times | Published

nonetheless address the issue on its merits. *108 Section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1991), provides that

Thomas v. State

581 So. 2d 992, 1991 WL 115590

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 28, 1991 | Docket: 1683815

Cited 14 times | Published

determination of the amount of restitution. Section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1987), requires the

Abbott v. State

543 So. 2d 411, 1989 WL 52811

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 17, 1989 | Docket: 1729731

Cited 14 times | Published

property as a condition of probation under section 775.089 should be based on the fair market value of

Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors v. Florida (In Re Tower Environmental, Inc.)

260 B.R. 213, 14 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 229, 1998 Bankr. LEXIS 1944, 1998 WL 1757108

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Sep 9, 1998 | Docket: 1826078

Cited 13 times | Published

been required to make restitution (Fla.Stat. § 775.089) and pay the costs of investigation and prosecution

Bowman v. State

698 So. 2d 615, 1997 WL 525325

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 27, 1997 | Docket: 434505

Cited 13 times | Published

is on the state attorney," not the defendant. § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (1995). Accordingly, we reverse

Peters v. State

555 So. 2d 450, 1990 WL 2695

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 17, 1990 | Docket: 1724595

Cited 13 times | Published

ordered paid to the third victim. We reverse. Section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (Supp. 1988), authorizes

Moore v. State

694 So. 2d 836, 1997 WL 280068

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 28, 1997 | Docket: 1732805

Cited 12 times | Published

restitution before imposing restitution.[1] Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (Supp.1992), provides, in

Domaceti v. State

616 So. 2d 1148, 1993 WL 113350

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 14, 1993 | Docket: 1388393

Cited 12 times | Published

burden to show the amount of loss sustained. § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (Supp. 1988). A trial court is

GC v. State

560 So. 2d 1186, 1990 WL 6486

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 24, 1990 | Docket: 1478037

Cited 12 times | Published

in order to support an order of restitution, § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (1987), the order must be reversed

Malarkey v. State

975 So. 2d 538, 2008 WL 268903

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 1, 2008 | Docket: 1727292

Cited 11 times | Published

theft charged in the information. We agree. Section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2005), provides that

Childers v. State

936 So. 2d 585, 2006 WL 2620262

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 2, 2006 | Docket: 109021

Cited 11 times | Published

"victim" entitled to restitution as defined by section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2002). II. Analysis

Winborn v. State

625 So. 2d 977, 1993 WL 424225

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 22, 1993 | Docket: 2582361

Cited 11 times | Published

victim's loss by a preponderance of the evidence. § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (1991); Thomas v. State, 581 So

Bayer v. State

597 So. 2d 870, 1992 WL 70142

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 10, 1992 | Docket: 1704883

Cited 11 times | Published

to go beyond the statutory requirement of section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1985) that restitution

Dailey v. State

575 So. 2d 237, 1991 WL 13574

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 6, 1991 | Docket: 1731358

Cited 11 times | Published

trial judge, however, failed to comply with section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1985), which requires that

Paterno v. Fernandez

569 So. 2d 1349, 1990 WL 175107

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 13, 1990 | Docket: 1660554

Cited 11 times | Published

stole $20,000 or more from the plaintiffs. Section 775.089(8), Florida Statute (1985) reads in pertinent

Bass v. State

473 So. 2d 1367, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1923

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 9, 1985 | Docket: 1510508

Cited 11 times | Published

in conjunction with punishment, pursuant to Section 775.089(1), Florida Statutes (1983), or as a condition

Kiriazes v. State

798 So. 2d 789, 2001 WL 1219487

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 12, 2001 | Docket: 1668261

Cited 10 times | Published

v. State, 786 So.2d 1173 (Fla.2001). [3] Section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes, provides in pertinent

JS v. State

717 So. 2d 175, 1998 WL 634876

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 16, 1998 | Docket: 1681493

Cited 10 times | Published

statute authorizing them. We recognize that section 775.089(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1997), permits restitution

State v. MacLeod

600 So. 2d 1096, 1992 WL 85180

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 30, 1992 | Docket: 539381

Cited 10 times | Published

DENYING A MOTION FOR RESTITUTION PURSUANT TO SECTION 775.089, FLORIDA STATUTES (1989) MAY BE APPEALED BY

Denmark v. State

588 So. 2d 324, 1991 WL 225568

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 6, 1991 | Docket: 2587219

Cited 10 times | Published

not done so by appellate whim or caprice. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1989), orders restitution

Soriano v. State

968 So. 2d 112, 2007 WL 4124907

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 21, 2007 | Docket: 1497866

Cited 9 times | Published

directly or indirectly by the defendant's offense. § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. Where the proper amount of restitution

IM v. State

917 So. 2d 927, 2005 WL 3406328

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 14, 2005 | Docket: 448806

Cited 9 times | Published

for further proceedings in accordance with section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2004). Motion for Judgment

Bowers v. State

679 So. 2d 340, 1996 WL 496162

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 4, 1996 | Docket: 1666057

Cited 9 times | Published

may impose restitution in accordance with section 775.089, Florida Statutes. We affirm without further

JOS v. State

668 So. 2d 1082, 1996 WL 90570

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 5, 1996 | Docket: 1687094

Cited 9 times | Published

related to the defendant's criminal episode.... § 775.089(1)(a), Fla.Stat. (Supp.1994) (emphasis added)

JOS v. State

668 So. 2d 1082, 1996 WL 90570

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 5, 1996 | Docket: 1687094

Cited 9 times | Published

related to the defendant's criminal episode.... § 775.089(1)(a), Fla.Stat. (Supp.1994) (emphasis added)

Bryant v. State

661 So. 2d 1315, 1995 WL 642682

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 3, 1995 | Docket: 1526414

Cited 9 times | Published

hearing and pronouncement in compliance with section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1993). Judgments and sentences

Allred v. State

642 So. 2d 650, 1994 WL 502577

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 16, 1994 | Docket: 549624

Cited 9 times | Published

financial resources and needs in accordance with section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes. See Hawthorne v. State

Dominique v. State

590 So. 2d 1059, 1991 WL 269753

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 18, 1991 | Docket: 458149

Cited 9 times | Published

fair opportunity to be heard on the question. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1987), in pertinent part

Denson v. State

556 So. 2d 823, 1990 WL 14887

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 15, 1990 | Docket: 543011

Cited 9 times | Published

physical damage to property and related expenses. Section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes, authorizes restitution

Dickens v. State

556 So. 2d 782, 1990 WL 10220

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 9, 1990 | Docket: 543007

Cited 9 times | Published

restitution is authorized and governed by section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1987). This section does

Morel v. State

547 So. 2d 341, 1989 WL 89683

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 11, 1989 | Docket: 1738707

Cited 9 times | Published

Absent reasons not material in this case, section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1985), requires the

Thomas v. State

517 So. 2d 132, 1987 WL 3352

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 30, 1987 | Docket: 2582627

Cited 9 times | Published

restitution was an error and reverse. Pursuant to section 775.089(6), (7), Florida Statutes (1985) the trial

Cliburn v. State

510 So. 2d 1155, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1944

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 11, 1987 | Docket: 1593171

Cited 9 times | Published

the alleged burglary restitution costs under Section 775.089(1), Florida Statutes (1983). There is no evidence

Spivey v. State

501 So. 2d 698, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 401

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 28, 1987 | Docket: 1527717

Cited 9 times | Published

not objected to at the time of sentencing. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1985) controls the imposition

Morgan v. State

491 So. 2d 326, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1549

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 15, 1986 | Docket: 1383144

Cited 9 times | Published

of the entry of the restitution order. See Section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1984 Supp.); Ballance

Bakos v. State

698 So. 2d 943, 1997 WL 577998

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 17, 1997 | Docket: 434721

Cited 8 times | Published

reasons set forth below, we reverse in part. Section 775.089 provides for restitution "caused directly or

JK v. State

695 So. 2d 868, 1997 WL 330593

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 18, 1997 | Docket: 425017

Cited 8 times | Published

restitution as part of adult probation, where section 775.089 imposes no duty on the trial court to make

Nieves v. State

678 So. 2d 468, 1996 WL 464157

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 16, 1996 | Docket: 1737036

Cited 8 times | Published

restitution. However, effective May 8, 1995, section 775.089(6) was amended to provide that financial resources

Mitchel v. CIGNA PROPERTY AND CAS. INS.

625 So. 2d 862, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 9173, 1993 WL 347453

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 14, 1993 | Docket: 1517507

Cited 8 times | Published

fine. In addition, he undertook, pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1991),[3] to make restitution

State v. Butz

568 So. 2d 537, 1990 WL 159658

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 24, 1990 | Docket: 2506336

Cited 8 times | Published

court neither ordered restitution pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1989), nor stated its reasons

Grice v. State

528 So. 2d 1347, 1988 WL 81553

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 8, 1988 | Docket: 1717648

Cited 8 times | Published

appellant to make restitution as mandated by Section 775.089, Florida Statutes. The trial judge held a hearing

State v. Champe

373 So. 2d 874

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Feb 8, 1979 | Docket: 1772735

Cited 8 times | Published

to order a defendant to make restitution, Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1977), and we recently held

TJN v. State

977 So. 2d 770, 2008 WL 818808

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 28, 2008 | Docket: 550940

Cited 7 times | Published

general statute governing restitution awards, section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2006),[1] provides in part:

IM v. State

958 So. 2d 1014, 2007 WL 1555737

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 31, 2007 | Docket: 1414229

Cited 7 times | Published

child did not have the ability to pay. Under section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (2005), the defendant's

Hillsborough County v. Lanier

898 So. 2d 141, 2005 WL 544208

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 9, 2005 | Docket: 1447926

Cited 7 times | Published

proceeding for relief against creditors, citing section 775.089(10)(b), Florida Statutes (2000); that the restitution

Davis v. State

741 So. 2d 1213, 1999 WL 765857

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 29, 1999 | Docket: 1790152

Cited 7 times | Published

damages or loss caused by the defendant's offense." § 775.089(1), Fla. Stat. (1997). Although the connection

Noland v. State

734 So. 2d 464, 1999 WL 280391

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 7, 1999 | Docket: 1730992

Cited 7 times | Published

says is the evidence in the case. NOTES [1] Section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes, provides in relevant

LO v. State

718 So. 2d 155, 1998 WL 574314

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 10, 1998 | Docket: 286685

Cited 7 times | Published

2d at 472-73.[6] A prime concern underlying section 775.089 is twofold: to give the perpetrator of a crime

AG v. State

718 So. 2d 854, 1998 WL 552824

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 26, 1998 | Docket: 466367

Cited 7 times | Published

of Florida, which amended Florida Statute section 775.089(1)(a) by adding the italized language below:

Board of Regents v. Taborsky

648 So. 2d 748, 1994 WL 497991

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 14, 1994 | Docket: 1342313

Cited 7 times | Published

judge further ordered that "pursuant to Florida Statute 775.089(8) [Taborsky] is hereby estopped by his

Bain v. State

642 So. 2d 578, 1994 WL 419618

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 12, 1994 | Docket: 1529408

Cited 7 times | Published

to pay, and related matters as set out in section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (1993), the lower court

Delks v. State

622 So. 2d 624, 1993 WL 309166

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 13, 1993 | Docket: 547113

Cited 7 times | Published

to the testimony regarding these reports. Section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (1991) places the burden

Powell v. State

595 So. 2d 223, 1992 WL 37151

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 2, 1992 | Docket: 1299254

Cited 7 times | Published

or indirectly by the defendant's offense," see § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (1989), the restitution order

Butts v. State

575 So. 2d 1379, 1991 WL 32995

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 14, 1991 | Docket: 1443953

Cited 7 times | Published

error. In the past, this court has held that section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1989), requires a sentencing

Smith v. Bartlett

570 So. 2d 360, 1990 WL 160715

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 25, 1990 | Docket: 1704115

Cited 7 times | Published

judgment determining liability of Smith based on section 775.089(8), Florida Statutes (1989) which provides:

Arling v. State

559 So. 2d 1274, 1990 WL 48602

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 18, 1990 | Docket: 1751485

Cited 7 times | Published

disagree. Absent clear and compelling reasons, section 775.089(1), Florida Statutes (1985), requires the trial

Garrison v. State

553 So. 2d 1377, 1989 WL 156226

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 27, 1989 | Docket: 377907

Cited 7 times | Published

by the defendant's offense" for purposes of section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1987). The victim, Mr. Terry

Gaskin v. State

513 So. 2d 1087, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2330

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 29, 1987 | Docket: 1295040

Cited 7 times | Published

make restitution of $9,921.72 pursuant to Section 775.089, Florida Statutes. He also appeals the imposition

Amison v. State

504 So. 2d 473, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 823

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 18, 1987 | Docket: 453435

Cited 7 times | Published

The court entered judgment and pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1985), ordered appellant

Pettway v. State

502 So. 2d 1366

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 27, 1987 | Docket: 2534153

Cited 7 times | Published

judge failed to follow the requirements of section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1985). That subsection

Mansell v. State

498 So. 2d 604, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2569

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 3, 1986 | Docket: 5028

Cited 7 times | Published

a result of the offense in accordance with section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (1985). RYDER and SCHOONOVER

GH v. State

414 So. 2d 1135

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 8, 1982 | Docket: 1706980

Cited 7 times | Published

similarly worded counterpart for adult offenders, Section 775.089(1), Florida Statutes (1981), which allows a

CMS v. State

997 So. 2d 520, 2008 WL 5412326

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 31, 2008 | Docket: 1721000

Cited 6 times | Published

discretion to the courts in making these awards. See § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2006) (directing court to award

Johnson v. State

942 So. 2d 415, 2006 WL 2844571

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 6, 2006 | Docket: 1736920

Cited 6 times | Published

Hawthorne, 573 So.2d 330, 333 (Fla.1991). Section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (2004), in pertinent part

Molter v. State

892 So. 2d 1115, 2004 WL 2599449

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 17, 2004 | Docket: 471979

Cited 6 times | Published

was required to hear evidence on the matter. § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2002); Smith v. State, 801 So

Bernard v. State

859 So. 2d 560, 2003 WL 22734841

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 21, 2003 | Docket: 1684347

Cited 6 times | Published

P. 3.800(b)(2). The restitution statute, section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2002), provides in

Santana v. State

795 So. 2d 1112, 2001 WL 1174293

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 5, 2001 | Docket: 64808

Cited 6 times | Published

damage or loss caused by the defendant's offense. § 775.089, Fla. Stat. (1999). The state attorney has the

Sun Chevrolet, Inc. v. Crespo

613 So. 2d 105, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 621, 18 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 374

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 26, 1993 | Docket: 454107

Cited 6 times | Published

action based on Florida's restitution statute, § 775.089(8), Fla. Stat. (1989), and that Sun Chevrolet

Paterson v. State

612 So. 2d 692, 1993 WL 12404

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 26, 1993 | Docket: 1262287

Cited 6 times | Published

recovery by the victim is contemplated by section 775.089(8), Florida Statutes (1989). Accordingly, we

Strickland v. State

610 So. 2d 705, 1992 WL 379810

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 23, 1992 | Docket: 1413589

Cited 6 times | Published

450 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). In Peters, we said: Section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (Supp. 1988), authorizes

Shova v. Eller

606 So. 2d 400, 1992 WL 213124

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 4, 1992 | Docket: 132066

Cited 6 times | Published

even if this section provides tort immunity. Section 775.089, Fla. Stat. (1989). [14] According to the

LS v. State

593 So. 2d 296, 1992 WL 9655

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 24, 1992 | Docket: 446250

Cited 6 times | Published

Beattie, 536 So.2d 1078 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988). Section 775.089, Florida Statutes, 1989, is the general statute

Smith v. State

589 So. 2d 387, 1991 WL 239909

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 13, 1991 | Docket: 1440784

Cited 6 times | Published

against him by the trial court pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1987).[1] Appellant argues

O'Steen v. State

547 So. 2d 235, 1989 WL 77479

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 18, 1989 | Docket: 1474930

Cited 6 times | Published

condition to probation in accordance with s. 948.03. § 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1987) (emphasis supplied)

Leyba v. State

520 So. 2d 705, 1988 WL 16017

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 3, 1988 | Docket: 861724

Cited 6 times | Published

determining his ability to do so as required by Section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1985). See Pettway v

Snell v. State

502 So. 2d 489, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 514

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 11, 1987 | Docket: 2524372

Cited 6 times | Published

dependents, and other such factors pursuant to Section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1985), before ordering

Gilmore v. State

479 So. 2d 791, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2620

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 20, 1985 | Docket: 235672

Cited 6 times | Published

imposed as part of a sentence pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1983), the defendant must

Hunter v. State

48 So. 3d 174, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 18025, 2010 WL 4740187

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 24, 2010 | Docket: 60296531

Cited 5 times | Published

of restitution.” Id. (citations omitted). Section 775.089, Florida Statutes, permits a trial court to

Samuels v. State

11 So. 3d 413, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 4468, 2009 WL 1311013

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 13, 2009 | Docket: 1656876

Cited 5 times | Published

insurance was contemplated and permitted by section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2007), we affirm. Affirmed

JAB v. State

993 So. 2d 1150, 2008 WL 4790946

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 5, 2008 | Docket: 469444

Cited 5 times | Published

to the general restitution statute for adults, § 775.089, Fla. Stat. (2006), to determine issues related

JAB v. State

993 So. 2d 1150, 2008 WL 4790946

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 5, 2008 | Docket: 469444

Cited 5 times | Published

to the general restitution statute for adults, § 775.089, Fla. Stat. (2006), to determine issues related

Childers v. State

936 So. 2d 619, 2006 WL 2620273

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 28, 2006 | Docket: 2527183

Cited 5 times | Published

may be a "victim" as that term is used in section 775.089, Florida Statutes. My separate opinion in this

State v. Schuette

782 So. 2d 935, 2001 WL 313626

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 28, 2001 | Docket: 456432

Cited 5 times | Published

conviction of driving with a suspended license.[1] Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1999), provides, (1)(a)In

Rodriguez v. State

691 So. 2d 568, 1997 WL 168600

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 11, 1997 | Docket: 1424398

Cited 5 times | Published

Knaus v. State, 638 So.2d 156 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); § 775.089(1), Fla.Stat. (1993). Accordingly, we strike the

Fichera v. State

688 So. 2d 453, 1997 WL 82564

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 28, 1997 | Docket: 2580425

Cited 5 times | Published

appropriate, it must establish the schedule itself. See § 775.089(3), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1994). AFFIRMED in part,

Mitchell v. State

664 So. 2d 1099, 1995 WL 726534

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 8, 1995 | Docket: 1656137

Cited 5 times | Published

COBB and GOSHORN, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] See § 775.089(5), Fla. Stat. (1993).

Gliszczynski v. State

654 So. 2d 579, 1995 WL 214610

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 13, 1995 | Docket: 1710305

Cited 5 times | Published

to raise contemporaneous objection); see also § 775.089, Fla. Stat. (1991) ("the court shall order the

Moment v. State

645 So. 2d 502, 1994 WL 551462

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 12, 1994 | Docket: 2551309

Cited 5 times | Published

trial court considered the matters required in section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1991). As restitution

Bolling v. State

631 So. 2d 310, 1994 WL 7687

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 14, 1994 | Docket: 1465345

Cited 5 times | Published

argument based upon the applicable statute. Under section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes, a trial court shall

Gladfelter v. State

618 So. 2d 1364, 1993 WL 176646

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 27, 1993 | Docket: 1376362

Cited 5 times | Published

the victim injured by Gladfelter's driving. Section 775.089(2), Florida Statutes (1989), provides that

Burch v. State

617 So. 2d 846, 1993 WL 141257

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 5, 1993 | Docket: 2524865

Cited 5 times | Published

failed to consider the factors set out in section 775.089(6) and (7), Fla. Stat. (1989) which mandate

Hebert v. State

614 So. 2d 493, 1993 WL 46637

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Feb 25, 1993 | Docket: 1509875

Cited 5 times | Published

directly or indirectly by the defendant's offense." § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (1989). Petitioners now argue

Boss v. State

613 So. 2d 525, 1993 WL 9784

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 22, 1993 | Docket: 2565564

Cited 5 times | Published

specified period or in specified installments. See § 775.089(3)(a), Fla. Stat. (1991). Only the trial court

Cheatham v. State

593 So. 2d 270, 1992 WL 4463

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 15, 1992 | Docket: 2566857

Cited 5 times | Published

trial court erred in failing to comply with section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1989), in that it did not

Stewart v. State

571 So. 2d 485, 1990 WL 126218

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 29, 1990 | Docket: 1172973

Cited 5 times | Published

directly or indirectly by a defendant's offense, section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1987). There must

Johnson v. State

547 So. 2d 300, 1989 WL 88042

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 8, 1989 | Docket: 1738847

Cited 5 times | Published

for a hearing pursuant to the provisions of section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1987). See Howren v. State

DN v. State

529 So. 2d 1217, 1988 WL 80127

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 4, 1988 | Docket: 1523814

Cited 5 times | Published

final point on appeal, appellant argues that section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1987), the statute

Howren v. State

510 So. 2d 1142, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1927

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 7, 1987 | Docket: 1588107

Cited 5 times | Published

circumstances of this case do not justify it. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1985), does not require

Denson v. State

493 So. 2d 60, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1859

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 22, 1986 | Docket: 1671660

Cited 5 times | Published

to be heard the court committed no error. Section 775.089 was amended in 1984 to require the court to

Jones v. State

480 So. 2d 163, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2776

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 17, 1985 | Docket: 1667292

Cited 5 times | Published

Insurance Company, in the amount of $512. Section 775.089(1), Florida Statutes (1983) provides that a

Harris v. State

452 So. 2d 1041

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 6, 1984 | Docket: 2570913

Cited 5 times | Published

pay restitution, attorney fees, and costs. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1983), authorizes a court

Reeves v. State

372 So. 2d 1016

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 13, 1979 | Docket: 1695665

Cited 5 times | Published

burden that payment will impose upon him. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1977). In this case Reeves

Carter v. State

23 So. 3d 1238, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 17694, 2009 WL 4060861

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 25, 2009 | Docket: 1657336

Cited 4 times | Published

before ordering appellant to pay restitution. Section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2007), requires that

Dominguez v. Miami-Dade County

669 F. Supp. 2d 1340, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109614, 2009 WL 3756365

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Oct 20, 2009 | Docket: 2281392

Cited 4 times | Published

conversion and civil theft counterclaims.[11] Section 775.089(8), Florida Statutes, provides: The conviction

Bellot v. State

964 So. 2d 857, 2007 WL 2713555

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 19, 2007 | Docket: 1266939

Cited 4 times | Published

compelling reasons not to order such restitution. § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2005). Additionally, [w]hen

JD v. State

849 So. 2d 458, 2003 WL 21658455

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 16, 2003 | Docket: 447541

Cited 4 times | Published

or indirectly by the defendant's offense," section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2001), and the court

Wencel v. State

768 So. 2d 494, 2000 WL 1190738

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 23, 2000 | Docket: 1127323

Cited 4 times | Published

evidence standard required of the state. See § 775.089(8)(a)3, Fla. Stat. (1997). We agree with the trial

Bunch v. State

745 So. 2d 400, 1999 WL 960792

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 22, 1999 | Docket: 1689254

Cited 4 times | Published

ANTOON, C.J., and COBB, J., concur. NOTES [1] § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (1997), provides: (1)(a) In

Fisher v. State

722 So. 2d 873, 1998 WL 821773

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 20, 1998 | Docket: 1241888

Cited 4 times | Published

to a preponderance of the evidence standard. § 775.089(7), Fla.Stat. (1997). In a case such as this,

Triplett v. State

709 So. 2d 107, 1998 WL 31507

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 8, 1998 | Docket: 1682087

Cited 4 times | Published

collision.[1] In 1993, the legislature amended section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes, to require restitution

Cheek v. State

700 So. 2d 731, 1997 WL 578031

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 19, 1997 | Docket: 1373192

Cited 4 times | Published

order of restitution in this case pursuant to section 775.089(1)(a)2., Florida Statutes (1995). The loss

State v. Hitchmon

678 So. 2d 460, 1996 WL 460718

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 14, 1996 | Docket: 1736955

Cited 4 times | Published

any subsequent independent civil recovery." See § 775.089(8), Fla.Stat. From the crime victim's viewpoint

Filmore v. State

656 So. 2d 535, 1995 WL 334377

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 7, 1995 | Docket: 2581864

Cited 4 times | Published

(Fla. 4th DCA 1991) and cases cited therein. Section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1993), directs restitution

Crosby v. State

637 So. 2d 341, 1994 WL 203717

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 27, 1994 | Docket: 1521591

Cited 4 times | Published

v. State, 616 So.2d 1124 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (1991). The state only presented

Massie v. State

635 So. 2d 110, 1994 WL 122948

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 6, 1994 | Docket: 308799

Cited 4 times | Published

and remand for a new restitution hearing. See § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (Supp. 1992); Winborn v. State

Ebaugh v. State

623 So. 2d 844, 1993 WL 341121

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 10, 1993 | Docket: 1183534

Cited 4 times | Published

statute. More specifically, Ebaugh argues that section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1991), does not provide

Dyer v. State

622 So. 2d 1158, 1993 WL 314219

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 20, 1993 | Docket: 546740

Cited 4 times | Published

Williams, 520 So.2d 276, 277 (Fla. 1988). Section 775.089(7) provides: *1159 Any dispute as to the proper

Hodge v. State

603 So. 2d 1329, 1992 WL 191311

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 12, 1992 | Docket: 1475772

Cited 4 times | Published

the time and expense incurred is challenged. Section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1991), requires restitution

Blasco v. State

601 So. 2d 1264, 1992 WL 147146

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 30, 1992 | Docket: 1305165

Cited 4 times | Published

ordered. We affirm the trial court's order. Section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1991) requires that a

Anthony v. State

574 So. 2d 266, 1991 WL 15004

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 6, 1991 | Docket: 1437327

Cited 4 times | Published

other factors which it deems appropriate." Section 775.089(6), Fla. Stat. With regard to revocation of

Ahnen v. State

565 So. 2d 855, 1990 WL 114655

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 10, 1990 | Docket: 1403427

Cited 4 times | Published

fee. Before restitution may be awarded under section 775.089(1), Florida Statutes (1987), there must be

Hawthorne v. State

558 So. 2d 156, 1990 WL 26690

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 14, 1990 | Docket: 1726211

Cited 4 times | Published

reverse and remand as to the latter. Although Section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1988 Supp.), requires

Parker v. State

539 So. 2d 1168, 1989 WL 19567

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 9, 1989 | Docket: 93850

Cited 4 times | Published

The trial court exceeded its authority under section 775.089, Florida Statutes to order restitution by including

Flanagan v. State

536 So. 2d 275, 1988 WL 126641

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 30, 1988 | Docket: 313654

Cited 4 times | Published

impose upon a convicted defendant pursuant to section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (1985) (see McClure v

Williams v. State

507 So. 2d 1171, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1351

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 29, 1987 | Docket: 459960

Cited 4 times | Published

regard to his ability to pay, as required by section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1985). However, appellant

Bostic v. State

504 So. 2d 794, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 921

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 1, 1987 | Docket: 453304

Cited 4 times | Published

restitution as a condition of appellant's probation. Section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1985) requires that the

Gilford v. State

487 So. 2d 53, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 747

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 26, 1986 | Docket: 1797162

Cited 4 times | Published

also ordered to make restitution pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1983). Appellant argues

Thomas v. State

453 So. 2d 156

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 18, 1984 | Docket: 1163563

Cited 4 times | Published

consistent with the legislative mandate embodied in section 775.089(2), Florida Statutes (1983), that, in determining

S.M. v. State

159 So. 3d 966, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 3605, 2015 WL 1088436

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 13, 2015 | Docket: 60246720

Cited 3 times | Published

appropriate.” Hawthorne, 573 So.2d at 333 (quoting section 775.089(6), Fla. Stat. (1987)). In this case, the owner

Roofing v. Flemmings

138 So. 3d 524, 2014 WL 1696187, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 6260

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 30, 2014 | Docket: 60240701

Cited 3 times | Published

civil recovery. § 772.14, Fla. Stat. (2014); § 775.089(8), Fla. Stat (2014) (emphasis supplied); see

State v. Shields

31 So. 3d 281, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 4189, 2010 WL 1222968

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 31, 2010 | Docket: 1647903

Cited 3 times | Published

supported by the preponderance of the evidence. See § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2008); Hector v. State, 784 So

Johnson v. State

27 So. 3d 211, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 1343, 2010 WL 446892

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 10, 2010 | Docket: 2577596

Cited 3 times | Published

crimes from having contact with his victims.[1] Section 775.089(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2008), permits restitution

Sebastiano v. Sclafani

984 So. 2d 673, 2008 WL 2512122

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 25, 2008 | Docket: 1644843

Cited 3 times | Published

restitution award and a civil damages award, section 775.089(8)[, Florida Statutes (2007) ] specifically

State v. Childers

979 So. 2d 412, 2008 WL 1805461

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 23, 2008 | Docket: 1406715

Cited 3 times | Published

county was not a "victim" for purposes of section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2002), and as a result was

Kittelson v. State

980 So. 2d 533, 2008 WL 818267

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 28, 2008 | Docket: 1735536

Cited 3 times | Published

related to the defendant's criminal episode. § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2007). If the court does not

Gilileo v. State

923 So. 2d 612, 2006 WL 782436

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 29, 2006 | Docket: 114455

Cited 3 times | Published

directly or indirectly by the defendant's offense." § 775.089(1)(a)(1), Fla. Stat. (2004). "The burden of proving

Stafford v. Don Reid Ford, Inc.

920 So. 2d 791, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 2018, 2006 WL 358261

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 17, 2006 | Docket: 1440947

Cited 3 times | Published

determine these damages and order restitution. § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2005). Although Appellant acknowledges

AB v. State

910 So. 2d 415, 2005 WL 2291944

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 21, 2005 | Docket: 1744577

Cited 3 times | Published

So.2d 535, 535 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); see also § 775.089(6), Fla. Stat. (2005). Moreover, restitution for

Lewis v. State

874 So. 2d 18, 2004 WL 840215

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 21, 2004 | Docket: 2508668

Cited 3 times | Published

appellant to pay restitution, as mandated by section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2001), to the "Sheriff of

Johnston v. State

870 So. 2d 877, 2004 WL 401199

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 5, 2004 | Docket: 1330637

Cited 3 times | Published

underlying purpose of the restitution statute. See § 775.089, Fla.Stat. (Supp.1994). The motion is otherwise

Exilorme v. State

857 So. 2d 339, 2003 WL 22357815

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 17, 2003 | Docket: 1759298

Cited 3 times | Published

without a restitution hearing as required by section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2002), we reverse and remand

Jones v. State

846 So. 2d 662, 2003 WL 21274801

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 4, 2003 | Docket: 289426

Cited 3 times | Published

for payment of *663 restitution pursuant to section 775.089(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2000), we strike condition

Terry v. State

791 So. 2d 1162, 2001 WL 826709

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 24, 2001 | Docket: 507324

Cited 3 times | Published

remand for further proceedings consistent with section 775.089, Florida Statutes. See Rhoden, supra, at 123;

State v. Vandonick

800 So. 2d 239, 2001 WL 584404

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 1, 2001 | Docket: 1283167

Cited 3 times | Published

related to the defendant's criminal episode." § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (1997). When assessing the victim's

State v. Baker

713 So. 2d 1027, 1998 WL 288395

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 5, 1998 | Docket: 1604584

Cited 3 times | Published

of enforcement of the restitution order. See § 775.089(6)(b), Fla. Stat. (1995). However, the purpose

State v. Allen

743 So. 2d 532, 1997 WL 564205

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 12, 1997 | Docket: 1669946

Cited 3 times | Published

07(1)(k) is more clearly revealed by a review of section 775.089, the restitution statute it was designed to

CA v. State

685 So. 2d 1036, 1997 WL 11470

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 15, 1997 | Docket: 1735210

Cited 3 times | Published

than entering a written order. We disagree. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1995), and the cases interpreting

Proffitt v. UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COM'N

658 So. 2d 185, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 8202, 1995 WL 457071

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 4, 1995 | Docket: 439458

Cited 3 times | Published

1310 (Fla. 1991). In Smith, which involved section 775.089(8), Florida Statutes (1989), we held that one

Knaus v. State

638 So. 2d 156, 1994 WL 248056

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 8, 1994 | Docket: 2553075

Cited 3 times | Published

that portion of the restitution order. Under section 775.089(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1991), the sheriff's

Sims v. State

637 So. 2d 21, 1994 WL 178053

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 11, 1994 | Docket: 1521524

Cited 3 times | Published

financial circumstances which was his burden. § 775.089(7) Fla. Stat. (1993); Bolling v. State, 631 So

Therrien v. State

637 So. 2d 288, 1994 WL 151314

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 29, 1994 | Docket: 1521500

Cited 3 times | Published

Are you satisfied with that? DEFENDANT: Yes. Section 775.089(1)(b)2, Florida Statutes (1993) provides: An

Mayer v. State

632 So. 2d 678, 1994 WL 54790

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 25, 1994 | Docket: 1514080

Cited 3 times | Published

restitution. Restitution is provided for by section 775.089(1). It provides that the court: Shall order

Palag v. State

622 So. 2d 1151, 1993 WL 310684

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 18, 1993 | Docket: 2562562

Cited 3 times | Published

The parties recognize that the provisions of section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes, place a defendant

Smith v. State

614 So. 2d 525, 1993 WL 2659

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 12, 1993 | Docket: 1509780

Cited 3 times | Published

attorney or the appellate court. NOTES [1] Section 775.089(1)(a) provides: ... in addition to any punishment

Nix v. State

604 So. 2d 920, 1992 WL 217186

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 8, 1992 | Docket: 1289688

Cited 3 times | Published

defendant lacks the present ability to pay. Section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1989), provides, in

Hebert v. State

600 So. 2d 1293, 1992 WL 140970

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 25, 1992 | Docket: 1527805

Cited 3 times | Published

responsibility of ordering restitution under section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes, for loss occasioned

Harmon v. State

599 So. 2d 754, 1992 WL 115804

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 3, 1992 | Docket: 1741502

Cited 3 times | Published

court overruled defense counsel's objection. Section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1989), provides that

Reynolds v. State

598 So. 2d 188, 1992 WL 88928

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 5, 1992 | Docket: 1472138

Cited 3 times | Published

the presentence investigation (PSI). Under section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1989), appellant was not

Bowers v. State

596 So. 2d 480, 1992 WL 59214

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 24, 1992 | Docket: 287292

Cited 3 times | Published

court to adopt a payment schedule pursuant to Section 775.089(3), Florida Statutes (1989),[1] and in doing

Harris v. State

593 So. 2d 1169, 1992 WL 25820

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 13, 1992 | Docket: 1508925

Cited 3 times | Published

defender's office both at trial and on appeal. Section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1989), provides: (6)

Barkley v. State

585 So. 2d 418, 1991 WL 167325

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 30, 1991 | Docket: 159982

Cited 3 times | Published

not kill Lawson, it is necessary to review section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1989), the statutory authority

Watson v. State

579 So. 2d 900, 1991 WL 86821

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 29, 1991 | Docket: 1728703

Cited 3 times | Published

restitution which was unjustified pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1989). This section provides

Eloshway v. State

553 So. 2d 1258, 1989 WL 139535

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 22, 1989 | Docket: 1675729

Cited 3 times | Published

denied and this appeal ensued. Pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1987), as one of the conditions

Turner v. State

431 So. 2d 1017

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 30, 1983 | Docket: 2575596

Cited 3 times | Published

Finally, the trial judge did not comply with Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1981) in that he did not

JOSEPH SILKY v. STATE OF FLORIDA

238 So. 3d 810

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 13, 2017 | Docket: 6240864

Cited 2 times | Published

defendant to make restitution to the victim . . . .” § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2017). In 1993, the Florida

RACHELLE MARIE JAMES v. STATE OF FLORIDA

223 So. 3d 288, 2017 WL 2983286, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 10056

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 12, 2017 | Docket: 6088820

Cited 2 times | Published

additional pieces of jewelry. Pursuant to section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2013), a defendant

Elmer v. State

140 So. 3d 1132, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 9344, 2014 WL 2781814

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 20, 2014 | Docket: 60241375

Cited 2 times | Published

recovery to cases involving bodily injury. See § 775.089(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (1988) (“When an offense has

State v. Davis

133 So. 3d 1101, 2014 WL 444041, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 1431

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 5, 2014 | Docket: 60238677

Cited 2 times | Published

State v. Sanderson, 625 So.2d 471 (Fla.1993); § 775.089, Fla. Stat. (2012) (providing generally that "[i]n

Noel v. State

127 So. 3d 769, 2013 WL 6182407, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 18880

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 27, 2013 | Docket: 60236854

Cited 2 times | Published

courts are required by our restitution statute, section 775.089, Florida Statutes, to order the defendant to

D.E.M. v. State

109 So. 3d 1229, 2013 WL 1235900, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 5146

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 28, 2013 | Docket: 60229471

Cited 2 times | Published

compelling reasons not to order such restitution.” § 775.089(l)(a)l.-2., Fla. Stat. (2011). In determining

State v. Ford

27 So. 3d 725, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 910, 2010 WL 363888

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 3, 2010 | Docket: 1664744

Cited 2 times | Published

755 So.2d 830, 832 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); see § 775.089, Fla. Stat. (2009); § 948.03(1)(e), Fla. Stat

G.M.H. v. State

18 So. 3d 728, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 15190, 2009 WL 3233144

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 9, 2009 | Docket: 60252182

Cited 2 times | Published

insufficient evidence to support this award. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2007), provides, in pertinent

Ritch v. State

14 So. 3d 1104, 2009 WL 1636818

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 12, 2009 | Docket: 1290620

Cited 2 times | Published

caused the victim's loss, directly or indirectly. § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2005). It is not enough to show

L.R.L. v. State

9 So. 3d 714, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 3241

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 17, 2009 | Docket: 60309075

Cited 2 times | Published

*716related to the defendant’s criminal episode.” § 775.089(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (2007). The courts have treated

J.C. v. State

3 So. 3d 346, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 18622

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 12, 2008 | Docket: 60289155

Cited 2 times | Published

recently offered discounted retail prices. See § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2007) (providing that “[a]ny dispute

Schneider v. State

972 So. 2d 1079, 2008 WL 194935

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 25, 2008 | Docket: 1650242

Cited 2 times | Published

or indirectly by the offense and reverse. Section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2006), provides that:

AM v. State

958 So. 2d 461, 2007 WL 1342497

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 9, 2007 | Docket: 1734837

Cited 2 times | Published

related to his criminal mischief offense. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2004), requires that a court

Smith v. State

941 So. 2d 479, 2006 WL 3079009

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 1, 2006 | Docket: 1523688

Cited 2 times | Published

531 So.2d 965, 967 (Fla. 1988). Pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2005), a defendant shall

Maurer v. State

939 So. 2d 234, 2006 WL 2918722

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 13, 2006 | Docket: 1237170

Cited 2 times | Published

by proper application of the provisions of section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2005), which requires the

Koile v. State

934 So. 2d 1226, 31 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 501, 2006 Fla. LEXIS 1479, 2006 WL 1838565

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 6, 2006 | Docket: 64845912

Cited 2 times | Published

certified to be of great public importance: DOES SECTION 775.089, FLORIDA STATUTES (2003), AUTHORIZE A RESTITUTION

Ridley v. State

890 So. 2d 1261, 2005 WL 119465

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 21, 2005 | Docket: 1690279

Cited 2 times | Published

unauthorized motion for rehearing, asserting section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2002), the criminal restitution

Verola v. Colton (In Re Verola)

296 B.R. 266, 50 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 1597, 16 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 188, 2003 Bankr. LEXIS 869, 41 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 171

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. | Filed: Jul 8, 2003 | Docket: 1861295

Cited 2 times | Published

paid through the Clerk of Court, pursuant to Section 775.089(11)(a), in the manner specified in the judgement

Verola v. Colton (In Re Verola)

296 B.R. 266, 50 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 1597, 16 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 188, 2003 Bankr. LEXIS 869, 41 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 171

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. | Filed: Jul 8, 2003 | Docket: 1861295

Cited 2 times | Published

paid through the Clerk of Court, pursuant to Section 775.089(11)(a), in the manner specified in the judgement

Seidman v. State

847 So. 2d 1144, 2003 WL 21459558

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 25, 2003 | Docket: 1686650

Cited 2 times | Published

proper "victim" under the restitution statute. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2001), states in part: (1)(a)

Ashton v. State

790 So. 2d 1115, 2001 WL 584194

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 1, 2001 | Docket: 1411589

Cited 2 times | Published

made by a preponderance of the evidence. See § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (1999). In reviewing the order

Hector v. State

784 So. 2d 1207, 2001 WL 356254

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 11, 2001 | Docket: 2572129

Cited 2 times | Published

loss testified to by the victim. According to section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2000), "the court

Sheppard v. State

753 So. 2d 748, 2000 WL 293225

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 22, 2000 | Docket: 2526230

Cited 2 times | Published

distinguish between restitution, governed by section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1997), and costs of conviction

Hagan v. State

746 So. 2d 1241, 1999 WL 1259982

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 29, 1999 | Docket: 1360221

Cited 2 times | Published

amount of the victim's loss, as required by section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (1997). It is well established

Sims v. State

746 So. 2d 546, 1999 WL 1127735

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 10, 1999 | Docket: 2574808

Cited 2 times | Published

victim for payment of restitution pursuant to section 775.089(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1997). See Rodriguez

Weinstein v. State

745 So. 2d 1085, 1999 WL 1062232

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 24, 1999 | Docket: 1689236

Cited 2 times | Published

carrier's payment of policy limits. He relies on section 775.089(8), which provides: "The conviction of a defendant

Chapman v. State

733 So. 2d 1055, 1999 WL 228606

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 21, 1999 | Docket: 1660071

Cited 2 times | Published

never associated with Chapman. Pursuant to section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1995), Chapman is

Fernandez v. State

701 So. 2d 632, 1997 WL 699134

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 12, 1997 | Docket: 1423957

Cited 2 times | Published

future financial needs and earning ability. See § 775.089(6), Fla. Stat. (1995). A defendant who agrees

Watson v. State

699 So. 2d 835, 1997 WL 599991

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 1, 1997 | Docket: 1693901

Cited 2 times | Published

ordered him to pay $204,000 in restitution. Section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1995), provides in

Rivers v. State

677 So. 2d 53, 1996 WL 387426

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 12, 1996 | Docket: 1689894

Cited 2 times | Published

hearing and pronouncement in compliance with section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1993). Lastly, we remand

Henninger v. State

667 So. 2d 488, 1996 WL 44719

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 6, 1996 | Docket: 159984

Cited 2 times | Published

sentence which requires restitution pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1994 Supp.). In the sentence

Norman v. State

659 So. 2d 722, 1995 WL 518815

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 5, 1995 | Docket: 2564062

Cited 2 times | Published

for further proceedings in accordance with section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1993). See Dubois v. State

Shacraha v. State

635 So. 2d 1051, 1994 WL 149697

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 27, 1994 | Docket: 1352831

Cited 2 times | Published

payment of restitution must be made immediately. § 775.089(3)(c), Fla. Stat. The evidence in this case, even

Vanlieu v. State

630 So. 2d 1218, 1994 WL 12427

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 21, 1994 | Docket: 1519594

Cited 2 times | Published

for a restitution award to a victim of a crime. § 775.089(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (1991); Self v. State, 458 So

Osteen v. State

616 So. 2d 1215, 1993 WL 125166

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 23, 1993 | Docket: 1390991

Cited 2 times | Published

locate his missing property. Relying upon section 775.089(1), Florida Statutes (1987) and upon State

Touchton v. State

616 So. 2d 1124, 1993 WL 107060

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 13, 1993 | Docket: 1726774

Cited 2 times | Published

victim damage or loss in the amount ordered. See § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (1989). Not only did the state

Staudt v. State

616 So. 2d 600, 1993 WL 100260

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 7, 1993 | Docket: 321089

Cited 2 times | Published

police agency was not a "victim" as used within section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1987), and that investigative

House v. State

614 So. 2d 677, 1993 WL 55638

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 4, 1993 | Docket: 449438

Cited 2 times | Published

damage or loss in the amount ordered. See section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (1989); Morel v. State

Knaus v. State

608 So. 2d 557, 1992 WL 338548

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 18, 1992 | Docket: 2539029

Cited 2 times | Published

potential future ... earning abilit[ies]." See § 775.089(6), Fla. Stat. (1991). However, we reverse the

Snyder v. State

597 So. 2d 384, 1992 WL 76583

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 17, 1992 | Docket: 1704774

Cited 2 times | Published

compelling reasons for not ordering restitution. See § 775.089(1)(a) and (b), Fla. Stat. (1989). This record

Medina v. State

591 So. 2d 1085, 1991 WL 280144

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 31, 1991 | Docket: 849092

Cited 2 times | Published

defendant's present or potential future ability to pay. § 775.089(6), (7), Fla. Stat. (1989); see Williams v. State

O'CONNER v. State

587 So. 2d 596, 1991 WL 203116

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 9, 1991 | Docket: 1104357

Cited 2 times | Published

and the defendant's ability to pay restitution. § 775.089, Fla. Stat. (1989); Pettway v. State, 502 So.2d

Ocasio v. State

586 So. 2d 1177, 1991 WL 174659

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 11, 1991 | Docket: 1742586

Cited 2 times | Published

the court's finding in favor of the mother. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1988), in pertinent

Oliverio v. State

583 So. 2d 412, 1991 WL 138891

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 31, 1991 | Docket: 2569979

Cited 2 times | Published

determination of the factors set forth in section 775.089(6) and (7), Florida Statutes, i.e., the loss

Stanley v. State

580 So. 2d 349, 1991 WL 98038

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 12, 1991 | Docket: 1188036

Cited 2 times | Published

constructive notice that restitution would be imposed, § 775.089, Fla. Stat. (1989), and will have the opportunity

Pope v. State

575 So. 2d 307, 1991 WL 24866

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 27, 1991 | Docket: 2551112

Cited 2 times | Published

regard to her ability to pay restitution. See § 775.089(6), Fla. Stat. (1987). We, accordingly, reverse

Williams v. State

565 So. 2d 849, 1990 WL 115525

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 9, 1990 | Docket: 1403451

Cited 2 times | Published

under section 775.089. Although a trial court must follow the requirements under section 775.089(6) to

Bain v. State

559 So. 2d 106, 1990 WL 37489

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 4, 1990 | Docket: 2570672

Cited 2 times | Published

Statutes (1987), or as restitution pursuant to section 775.089(b), Florida Statutes (1987). Because we find

Anderson v. State

502 So. 2d 1288, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 583

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 18, 1987 | Docket: 2548781

Cited 2 times | Published

be ordered by the trial judge pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1985), clearly constitutes

M.P. v. State

256 So. 3d 231

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 21, 2018 | Docket: 64690135

Cited 1 times | Published

proceedings after the court orders restitution, see § 775.089(6), Fla. Stat. (2016), but in a juvenile case

Stephen v. Barone v. State

222 So. 3d 1235, 2017 WL 3091219, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 10488

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 21, 2017 | Docket: 6127583

Cited 1 times | Published

conduct a restitution hearing consistent with section 775,089(6)(a)-(b), Florida Statutes (2016). AFFIRMED

State v. Sandomeno

217 So. 3d 110, 2017 WL 1403616, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 5362

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 19, 2017 | Docket: 60265625

Cited 1 times | Published

the state to file a civil suit for damages. Section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2015) provides that

L.W. v. State

163 So. 3d 598, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 5035, 2015 WL 1578840

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 8, 2015 | Docket: 60247713

Cited 1 times | Published

at the time the restitution order is imposed. § 775.089(6)(b), Fla. Stat. (2014); Del Valle v. State,

L.W. v. State

163 So. 3d 598, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 5035, 2015 WL 1578840

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 8, 2015 | Docket: 60247713

Cited 1 times | Published

at the time the restitution order is imposed. § 775.089(6)(b), Fla. Stat. (2014); Del Valle v. State,

Schenk v. State

150 So. 3d 275, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 18173, 2014 WL 5781433

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 7, 2014 | Docket: 60244228

Cited 1 times | Published

victim’s loss by a preponderance of the evidence. § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2013). “Restitution must be proved

DJR v. State

139 So. 3d 458, 2014 WL 2217804, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 8206

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 29, 2014 | Docket: 60241140

Cited 1 times | Published

Childers, 979 So.2d 412, 414 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008); § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. Restitution must be proved by competent

Fernandez v. State

98 So. 3d 730, 2012 WL 4798679, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 17426

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 10, 2012 | Docket: 60312554

Cited 1 times | Published

Glaubius v. State, 688 So.2d 913, 915 (Fla.1997). Section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (2008), provides that

Faurisma v. State

61 So. 3d 497, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 8050, 2011 WL 2135516

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 1, 2011 | Docket: 60300493

Cited 1 times | Published

remand for a de novo *498restitution hearing. See § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2009); Iaconetti, 869 So.2d at

K.N. v. State

61 So. 3d 1258, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 7577, 2011 WL 2031432

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 25, 2011 | Docket: 60300422

Cited 1 times | Published

was expressly part of the plea agreement. See § 775.089(1)(b)(2) (“A plea agreement may contain provisions

Griffis v. Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission

57 So. 3d 929, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 4181, 2011 WL 1108797

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 28, 2011 | Docket: 2361981

Cited 1 times | Published

"restitution" under the general provisions of section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1991), rather than imposed

Myers v. State

37 So. 3d 978, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 9207, 2010 WL 2539434

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 25, 2010 | Docket: 2560885

Cited 1 times | Published

reflect that pursuant to the 1989 version of section 775.089(1), Florida Statutes, as it relates to his

LRL v. State

9 So. 3d 714, 2009 WL 1033757

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 17, 2009 | Docket: 1220639

Cited 1 times | Published

related to the defendant's criminal episode." § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2007). The courts have treated

E.D.B. v. State

5 So. 3d 787, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 2658

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 27, 2009 | Docket: 60297213

Cited 1 times | Published

are subject to [section] 775.089(5),” Florida Statutes. § 985.0301(5)(i). Section 775.089(5) addresses the

EDB v. State

5 So. 3d 787, 2009 WL 790131

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 27, 2009 | Docket: 1200699

Cited 1 times | Published

are subject to [section] 775.089(5)," Florida Statutes. § 985.0301(5)(i). Section 775.089(5) addresses the

JC v. State

3 So. 3d 346, 2008 WL 5191769

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 12, 2008 | Docket: 1652986

Cited 1 times | Published

recently offered discounted retail prices. See § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2007) (providing that "[a]ny dispute

McClintock v. State

995 So. 2d 1147, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 18374, 2008 WL 5100506

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 5, 2008 | Docket: 64856940

Cited 1 times | Published

all probation). The State argues that under section 775.089(3) of the Florida Statutes the trial court

J.A.B. v. State

993 So. 2d 1150, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 16973

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 5, 2008 | Docket: 64856343

Cited 1 times | Published

to the general restitution statute for adults, § 775.089, Fla. Stat. (2006), to determine issues related

State v. Castro

965 So. 2d 216, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 13868, 2007 WL 2480550

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 5, 2007 | Docket: 64852534

Cited 1 times | Published

trial court denied restitution pursuant to section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (2006). The court specifically

Peterson v. Therma Builders, Inc.

958 So. 2d 977, 2007 WL 1452164

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 18, 2007 | Docket: 1734961

Cited 1 times | Published

Builders in the civil action by operation of section 775.089(8), Florida Statutes (2003). On November 1

GC v. State

944 So. 2d 1099, 2006 WL 3330764

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 17, 2006 | Docket: 1649943

Cited 1 times | Published

established by a preponderance of the evidence, § 775.089(7), *1100 Fla. Stat. (2004), restitution is awarded

RAB v. State

932 So. 2d 1227, 2006 WL 1879103

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 7, 2006 | Docket: 1285543

Cited 1 times | Published

*1229 to the convicted offense pursuant to section 775.089(1)(b)(2), Florida Statutes (2005).[1] The resolution

SM v. State

881 So. 2d 78, 2004 WL 1857611

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 20, 2004 | Docket: 1465512

Cited 1 times | Published

substantial evidence to support the award.... Section 775.089 contemplates an evidentiary hearing when there

Henry v. State

840 So. 2d 1170, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 4406, 2003 WL 1717283

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 2, 2003 | Docket: 64821622

Cited 1 times | Published

she misappropriated was only $112,886.87. Section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2001), requires that

State v. MK

786 So. 2d 24, 2001 WL 420601

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 26, 2001 | Docket: 1681939

Cited 1 times | Published

appeal from "an order denying restitution under section 775.089 ." Counsel for the child contends that section

PH v. State

774 So. 2d 728, 2000 WL 1595970

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 27, 2000 | Docket: 1698066

Cited 1 times | Published

restitution definition of victim, and we agree. Section 775.089(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1997), defines the

Albury v. State

779 So. 2d 423, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 13193, 2000 WL 1504984

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 11, 2000 | Docket: 64804162

Cited 1 times | Published

events at the sentencing hearing and so do we. Section 775.089 (l)(a), Florida Statutes (1997), requires a

Strickland v. State

746 So. 2d 1189, 1999 WL 1127741

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 10, 1999 | Docket: 1714954

Cited 1 times | Published

restitution in accordance with s. 775.089." In turn, section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1997), provides, "Payment

J.S. v. State

717 So. 2d 175, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 11624

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 16, 1998 | Docket: 64782684

Cited 1 times | Published

statute authorizing them. We recognize that section 775.089(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1997), permits restitution

Montalvo v. State

705 So. 2d 984, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 870, 1998 WL 39280

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 4, 1998 | Docket: 64778822

Cited 1 times | Published

requirements mandated by the Florida legislature in section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1995), but has the potential

Boulais v. State

706 So. 2d 365, 1998 WL 31447

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 30, 1998 | Docket: 1280721

Cited 1 times | Published

investigation company, Emerald Coast Investigations. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1995), requires a criminal

Law v. State

705 So. 2d 632, 1998 WL 11835

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 16, 1998 | Docket: 1554997

Cited 1 times | Published

by the defendant's offenses as provided by section 775.089(1)(a)1-2 of the Florida Statutes (1995). The

Law v. State

705 So. 2d 632, 1998 WL 11835

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 16, 1998 | Docket: 1554997

Cited 1 times | Published

by the defendant's offenses as provided by section 775.089(1)(a)1-2 of the Florida Statutes (1995). The

Stombaugh v. State

704 So. 2d 723, 1998 WL 4108

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 9, 1998 | Docket: 1354670

Cited 1 times | Published

v. State, 648 So.2d 274 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (1996). AFFIRMED, in part; REVERSED

Simpson v. State

712 So. 2d 1, 1997 WL 677990

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 24, 1997 | Docket: 1737415

Cited 1 times | Published

the offense before restitution is appropriate. § 775.089(7), Fla.Stat. (1995). There must be a significant

Dowdy v. State

700 So. 2d 409, 1997 WL 578035

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 19, 1997 | Docket: 405856

Cited 1 times | Published

victim's loss to justify restitution. See section 775.089(1)(a)2, Florida Statutes. He also contends

Santiago v. State

669 So. 2d 334, 1996 WL 106396

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 13, 1996 | Docket: 1391209

Cited 1 times | Published

State v. Williams, 520 So.2d 276 (Fla.1988); Section 775.089(1)(a) Florida Statutes (1993). Affirmed.

Moore v. State

664 So. 2d 343, 1995 WL 738789

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 15, 1995 | Docket: 1655884

Cited 1 times | Published

State, 531 So.2d 965 (Fla. 1988)); see also § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (1993) (requiring sentencing

Robbins v. State

641 So. 2d 939, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 8586, 1994 WL 474931

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 2, 1994 | Docket: 64750527

Cited 1 times | Published

failed to introduce any evidence on this matter. § 775.089(7), Fla.Stat. (1993). Robbins, through her counsel

Lunsford v. State

637 So. 2d 348, 1994 WL 226605

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 27, 1994 | Docket: 237295

Cited 1 times | Published

conditioned on restitution of $2,458.55. Section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (1991) puts the burden

Gluesenkamp v. State

636 So. 2d 1367, 1994 WL 171595

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 9, 1994 | Docket: 1361295

Cited 1 times | Published

within the definition of "victim" provided by section 775.089(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1991). We agree and

McCoy v. State

632 So. 2d 181, 1994 WL 41842

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 11, 1994 | Docket: 462772

Cited 1 times | Published

financial resources and his ability to pay. See § 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1991); Mallard v. State

Driggers v. State

622 So. 2d 1374, 1993 WL 331911

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 3, 1993 | Docket: 807738

Cited 1 times | Published

must affirmatively assert his rights under section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes, to present evidence of

Critton v. State

619 So. 2d 495, 1993 WL 196341

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 11, 1993 | Docket: 1721607

Cited 1 times | Published

of a restitution order in accordance with section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes, may make the sentence

McManamon v. State

609 So. 2d 91, 1992 WL 340158

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 24, 1992 | Docket: 1473481

Cited 1 times | Published

had not inquired into his ability to pay. See § 775.089(6), Fla. Stat. (the court, in determining whether

Robinson v. State

605 So. 2d 500, 1992 WL 212020

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 2, 1992 | Docket: 1343192

Cited 1 times | Published

schedule pursuant to the restitution provision, Section 775.089(3), Florida Statutes (1989), or order the defendant

L.S. v. State

593 So. 2d 296, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 375

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 24, 1992 | Docket: 64665129

Cited 1 times | Published

Beattie, 536 So.2d 1078 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988). Section 775.089, Florida Statutes, 1989, is the general statute

Hatcher v. State

591 So. 2d 1134, 1992 WL 1344

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 8, 1992 | Docket: 541542

Cited 1 times | Published

the present case. This court has interpreted section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1989), as allowing the reservation

Bradley v. State

559 So. 2d 283, 1990 WL 33514

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 28, 1990 | Docket: 1751463

Cited 1 times | Published

hearing to consider the factors set forth in section 775.089(6) and (7), Florida Statutes (1987). These

Ferris v. State

558 So. 2d 179, 1990 WL 27955

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 16, 1990 | Docket: 1405771

Cited 1 times | Published

related to the crime charged may be imposed by section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1987). State v. Williams

Anderson v. State

556 So. 2d 527, 1990 WL 9294

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 8, 1990 | Docket: 1528372

Cited 1 times | Published

v. State, 520 So.2d 705 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988); § 775.089(6), Fla. Stat. (1987). Accordingly, we reverse

Oropesa v. State

555 So. 2d 389, 1989 WL 136156

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 14, 1989 | Docket: 1395875

Cited 1 times | Published

State, 447 So.2d 974 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984) (same); § 775.089(6), Fla. Stat. (1987). At that inquiry, it will

Thrasher v. State

528 So. 2d 474, 1988 WL 70561

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 8, 1988 | Docket: 1367676

Cited 1 times | Published

restitution, or to compliance with the provisions of section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1985),[2] the record

Hart v. State

516 So. 2d 58, 1987 WL 2118

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 2, 1987 | Docket: 1678041

Cited 1 times | Published

in failing to consider, as is required by section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1985), her financial

Chanthan Scott Khouleanghak v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 18, 2025 | Docket: 70834887

Published

that governs restitution in criminal cases is Section 775.089, Florida Statutes. 1 Defendant

K. L. v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 6, 2025 | Docket: 70472152

Published

minimal indicia of reliability." See also § 775.089(7)(c), Fla. Stat. (2023). Here, the victim

A. L. W. v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 9, 2025 | Docket: 69864089

Published

while criminal restitution is governed by section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2023). Compare

Tara Jeanine Tanksley v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 26, 2025 | Docket: 69674136

Published

v. State, 531 So. 2d 965, 966 (Fla. 1988). Section 775.089(6)(a), Florida Statutes, provides: “The court

Knowles v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 19, 2025 | Docket: 69651316

Published

jurisdiction and authority, see § 34.01(1)(a); § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2023), and the monetary limits

Knowles v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 19, 2025 | Docket: 69651316

Published

jurisdiction and authority, see § 34.01(1)(a); § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2023), and the monetary limits

Gabriel Verdejo v. the State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 12, 2025 | Docket: 69632704

Published

7 Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2024), governs restitution

Daniel Kaplan v. Kenneth B. Schurr

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 8, 2025 | Docket: 69525394

Published

on the language of the restitution statute, section 775.089(1)(c)1., Florida Statutes (2023) to characterize

Daniel Kaplan v. Kenneth B. Schurr

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 8, 2025 | Docket: 69525394

Published

on the language of the restitution statute, section 775.089(1)(c)1., Florida Statutes (2023) to characterize

Francisco O. Perez v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 4, 2024 | Docket: 69127386

Published

relationship between the offense and the loss. § 775.089, Fla. Stat. (2020). As the state failed

FRANKLIN v. STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 10, 2024 | Docket: 68300062

Published

relationship to the crime charged). Section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2019), provides that

Sebastian Garcia Lucas v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 15, 2024 | Docket: 68529924

Published

response to the offense or criminal episode. § 775.089(1)(c)1., Fla. Stat. (2022) (emphasis added). In

Kevin Douglas Ray v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 27, 2024 | Docket: 68380299

Published

victim and her children without complying with section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2022). We disagree with

ASLEYS ACOSTA v. STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 19, 2024 | Docket: 67324133

Published

of crime and length of incarceration. Compare § 775.089(6)(b), Fla. Stat. (2019) ("The criminal court

KEVAN ANGLIN v. STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 9, 2023 | Docket: 67677266

Published

response to the offense or criminal episode. § 775.089(1)(c)1., Fla. Stat. (2019) (emphasis added).

K.J.H., A CHILD vs STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 5, 2023 | Docket: 66761073

Published

Appellant’s objections, the trial court, relying on section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2022), issued an order granting

GARDINO MARTINEZ MESA v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 8, 2023 | Docket: 66795940

Published

of the offense is on the state attorney. See § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2019); Strickland v. State, 746

LINDA WEINREBER BARKER v. STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 23, 2022 | Docket: 65879523

Published

amount of loss by a preponderance of the evidence. § 775.089(7)(c), Fla. Stat. (2021). The defendant relies

ARTHUR SAGER v. MADALINA BLANCO AND RICARDO F. BLANCO

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 12, 2022 | Docket: 65417127

Published

been a party in the criminal action. Section 775.089(8), Florida Statutes, which is part of the

ARTHUR SAGER v. MADALINA BLANCO AND RICARDO F. BLANCO

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 15, 2022 | Docket: 63385757

Published

been a party in the criminal action. Section 775.089(8), Florida Statutes, which is part of the

MICHAEL LOVE v. STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 2, 2022 | Docket: 62646384

Published

court finds a compelling reason not to do so. § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2020). In Livingston v. State

STATE OF FLORIDA v. P.C.L., a Child

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 5, 2022 | Docket: 61689373

Published

902 So. 2d 822, 824 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005) (citing § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2019)). For adults, restitution

ROSA ELENA MARTINEZ v. STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 28, 2021 | Docket: 59860102

Published

have been, had the crime not been committed. See § 775.089, Fla. Stat. (2015). This is accomplished by requiring

Kelvin Leon Jones v. Governor of Florida

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Sep 11, 2020 | Docket: 18439265

Published

private attorney or collection agent); Fla. Stat. § 775.089(12)(a) (authorizing the court to enter an income

Kelvin Leon Jones v. Governor of Florida

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Sep 11, 2020 | Docket: 18430246

Published

private attorney or collection agent); Fla. Stat. § 775.089(12)(a) (authorizing the court to enter an income

E.J.A., A CHILD v. STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 12, 2020 | Docket: 17436371

Published

similarly to the statute applicable to adults, section 775.089, Florida Statutes. See L.R.L. v. State, 9 So

Mark Anthony Tolbert v. State of Florida

268 So. 3d 947

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 22, 2019 | Docket: 14973290

Published

related to the defendant’s criminal episode. § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. The State has the burden of

CRICKET KATHLEEN TOOLE v. STATE OF FLORIDA

270 So. 3d 371

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 20, 2019 | Docket: 14560240

Published

market value, of many of the items. Section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes, provides: Any

S.S. v. State

261 So. 3d 704

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 14, 2018 | Docket: 64700827

Published

similarly to the adult restitution statute, section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2017), which allows

S.S. v. State

261 So. 3d 704

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 14, 2018 | Docket: 64700826

Published

similarly to the adult restitution statute, section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2017), which allows

M. P. v. STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 21, 2018 | Docket: 7913117

Published

proceedings after the court orders restitution, see § 775.089(6), Fla. Stat. (2016), but in a juvenile case

JUNIO SAINVIL v. STATE OF FLORIDA

248 So. 3d 148

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 30, 2018 | Docket: 6958944

Published

appellant’s ability to pay restitution.” Id. (citing § 775.089(6), Fla. Stat. (1993)). Here, the State concedes

Parague v. State

222 So. 3d 567, 2017 WL 2457251, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 8309

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 7, 2017 | Docket: 60269762

Published

the trial court’s imposition of restitution, section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2015), provides, in relevant

A.J.A. v. State

215 So. 3d 639, 2017 WL 1290004, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 4779

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 7, 2017 | Docket: 60264863

Published

proven by a preponderance of the evidence. See § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2016); Santana v. State, 795 So

A.J.A. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 3, 2017 | Docket: 4684548

Published

proven by a preponderance of the evidence. See § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2016); Santana v. State, 795

Johnson v. State

207 So. 3d 1030, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 366

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 17, 2017 | Docket: 63631930

Published

but one. Appellant argues that pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2013), the trial court erred

Gregory Omar Johnson v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 16, 2017 | Docket: 4568513

Published

but one. Appellant argues that pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2013), the trial court

Holt v. State

220 So. 3d 455, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 16910, 2016 WL 6684139

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 14, 2016 | Docket: 60267226

Published

State, 139 So.3d 458, 459 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014); § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. The amount of restitution is generally

and SC14-1952 Jean Claude Noel v. State of Florida and Jean Claude Noel v. State of Florida

191 So. 3d 370, 2016 WL 1592703

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 21, 2016 | Docket: 3056545

Published

order such restitution.”. § 775.089(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (2010); see also § 775.089(6)(a), Fla. Stat. (2010)

Andrew J. Curtis v. State of Florida

187 So. 3d 947, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 4532, 2016 WL 1133743

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 23, 2016 | Docket: 3046953

Published

So.3d 425, 426 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)). Section 775.089, Florida Statutes, requires the trial court

Latham v. State

185 So. 3d 686, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 1754, 2016 WL 540650

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 10, 2016 | Docket: 3035162

Published

counsel cited the general restitution.statute, section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2012), and State

E.G., a child v. State of Florida

180 So. 3d 1152, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 18407

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 9, 2015 | Docket: 3019349

Published

evidence,” and not beyond a reasonable doubt. § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2014); see § 985.437

Strout v. State

180 So. 3d 1052, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 16183, 2015 WL 6554520

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 30, 2015 | Docket: 60252287

Published

859 So.2d 560, 562 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)). Section 775.089, Florida Statutes, requires a defendant to

State of Florida v. Mary Gayle Tomasheski

168 So. 3d 248, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 9265, 2015 WL 3759610

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 17, 2015 | Docket: 2679253

Published

the “significant relationship” test under section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2012). The defendant

L.W. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 8, 2015 | Docket: 2647542

Published

at the time the restitution order is imposed. § 775.089(6)(b), Fla. Stat. (2014); Del Valle v. State,

Richard Allen White v. State

190 So. 3d 99, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 4726, 2015 WL 1456034

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 1, 2015 | Docket: 2679423

Published

sixty days thereafter, in accordance with Section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes, and Florida Rule of

K.R., a child v. State

155 So. 3d 507, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 1035, 2015 WL 340705

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 28, 2015 | Docket: 2628639

Published

R. appeals the order of restitution. Section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (2012), states: “Any dispute

Golden Vasquez v. State

162 So. 3d 117, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 18085, 2014 WL 5618047

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 5, 2014 | Docket: 2592851

Published

sixty days thereafter, in accordance with Section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes, and Florida Rule of

Christina Prinz v. State

149 So. 3d 65, 2014 WL 4083377, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 12806

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 20, 2014 | Docket: 1120040

Published

competent, substantial evidence.” Id. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2010), which governs restitution

Katrina R. Phillips v. State

141 So. 3d 702, 2014 WL 2957435, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 10117

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 2, 2014 | Docket: 538

Published

recommend that our state legislature revisit section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2012), and consider providing

Katrina R. Phillips v. State

141 So. 3d 702, 2014 WL 2957435, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 10117

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 2, 2014 | Docket: 538

Published

recommend that our state legislature revisit section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2012), and consider providing

J.W.A. v. State

128 So. 3d 912, 2013 WL 6690221, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 20259

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 20, 2013 | Docket: 60237213

Published

crime in Florida are entitled to restitution, § 775.089, Florida Statutes, the award of which is reviewed

Angry v. State

102 So. 3d 767, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 21755, 2012 WL 6603067

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 19, 2012 | Docket: 60226787

Published

restitution order which was entered pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Statutes, upon evidence as to the

Dagerath v. State

100 So. 3d 1260, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 20224, 2012 WL 5870086

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 21, 2012 | Docket: 60225613

Published

and pertinent case law to the facts here. Section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2010), provides, in

Anton v. State

92 So. 3d 876, 2012 WL 2579537, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 10796

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 5, 2012 | Docket: 60310363

Published

civil liens and income deduction orders under section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2003). The trial court dismissed

Ianieri v. State

84 So. 3d 1263, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 6031, 2012 WL 1314210

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 18, 2012 | Docket: 60306646

Published

beginning once she is released from prison. Section 775.089(3)(c), Florida Statutes, provides that a trial

Wilcox v. State

79 So. 3d 878, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 1940, 2012 WL 407095

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 10, 2012 | Docket: 60305396

Published

found that the lien was permissible under section 775.089, Florida Statutes. However, the court appears

Bianchini v. State

77 So. 3d 247, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 509, 2012 WL 126438

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 18, 2012 | Docket: 60304689

Published

related to the defendant’s criminal episode.” § 775.089(l)(a)1.2., Fla. Stat. (2005). One purpose of the

M.P. v. State

66 So. 3d 1055, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 12144

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 3, 2011 | Docket: 60301822

Published

directly or indirectly by M.P.’s offense. See § 775.089(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (2009). There must be a significant

MP v. State

66 So. 3d 1055, 2011 WL 3303476

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 3, 2011 | Docket: 2364913

Published

directly or indirectly by M.P.'s offense. See § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2009). There must be a significant

Redden v. State

56 So. 3d 79, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 2650, 2011 WL 711044

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 2, 2011 | Docket: 60298642

Published

evidence the amount of the victim’s loss. See § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2007); Gilileo v. State, 923 So

State v. Cohn

51 So. 3d 610, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 36, 2011 WL 92757

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 12, 2011 | Docket: 60297678

Published

damages or loss caused by the defendant’s offense. § 775.089(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (2009). The statute further

SCHUMMER v. State

46 So. 3d 1229, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 17651, 2010 WL 4628993

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 17, 2010 | Docket: 2396697

Published

Circuit Court, Escambia County, Florida. See § 775.089(8), Fla. Stat. (providing that restitution is

Stanley v. State

42 So. 3d 330, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 12167, 2010 WL 3238978

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 18, 2010 | Docket: 1647367

Published

Compensation Fund is not a "victim" as defined in section 775.089(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2009). That section

Cummings v. State

39 So. 3d 555, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 10559, 2010 WL 2836132

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 21, 2010 | Docket: 60294918

Published

loss was related to his criminal episode. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2008), provides as follows:

CANERDAY v. State

37 So. 3d 272, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 193, 2010 WL 143449

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 15, 2010 | Docket: 1668569

Published

loss as a result of the defendant's offense. § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2007); Glaubius v. State, 688

Cooks v. State

23 So. 3d 863, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 19616, 2009 WL 4827403

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 16, 2009 | Docket: 1657529

Published

the loss by a preponderance of the evidence. § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. `Such evidence must be established

Cherry v. State

15 So. 3d 774, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 9782, 2009 WL 2059420

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 17, 2009 | Docket: 1660495

Published

trial court entered a restitution order under section 775.089(5), Florida Statutes (2005). The restitution

C.M.S. v. State

997 So. 2d 520, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 20357

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 31, 2008 | Docket: 64857288

Published

discretion to the courts in making these awards. See § 775.089(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (2006) (directing court to award

Diaz v. Andy

987 So. 2d 698, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 8444, 2008 WL 2356712

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 11, 2008 | Docket: 64855284

Published

because there was no mast, boom, or sails. . Section 775.089(8), Florida Statutes (2006), provides in part:

ALBERTIE v. State

979 So. 2d 1086, 2008 WL 942291

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 9, 2008 | Docket: 1406731

Published

of a restitution order under our statutes. See § 775.089(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2006).[1],[2] This, in turn

T.J.N. v. State

977 So. 2d 770, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 4371

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 28, 2008 | Docket: 64854269

Published

general statute governing restitution awards, section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2006),1 provides in part:

I.M. v. State

958 So. 2d 1014, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 8666

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 31, 2007 | Docket: 64851097

Published

child did not have the ability to pay. Under section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (2005), the defendant’s

A.M. v. State

958 So. 2d 461, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 7122

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 9, 2007 | Docket: 64851013

Published

related to his criminal mischief offense. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2004), requires that a court

Connor v. State

944 So. 2d 488, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 20577, 2006 WL 3524290

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 8, 2006 | Docket: 64848248

Published

will conclude by noting that the preamble to section 775.089, Florida Statutes, states, “[T]he criminal

G.C. v. State

944 So. 2d 1099, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 19293

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 17, 2006 | Docket: 64848311

Published

established by a preponderance of the evidence, § 775.089(7), *1100Fla. Stat. (2004), restitution is awarded

R.A.B. v. State

932 So. 2d 1227, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 11336

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 7, 2006 | Docket: 64845677

Published

*1229to the convicted offense pursuant to section 775.089(l)(b)(2), Florida Statutes (2005).1 The resolution

Koile v. State

935 So. 2d 1226

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 6, 2006 | Docket: 1715739

Published

certified to be of great public importance: DOES SECTION 775.089, FLORIDA STATUTES (2003), AUTHORIZE A RESTITUTION

Childers v. State

936 So. 2d 619, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 18952

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 28, 2006 | Docket: 64846305

Published

may be a “victim” as that term is used in section 775.089, Florida Statutes. My separate opinion in this

Childers v. State

931 So. 2d 86, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 17207, 2006 WL 237081

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 2, 2006 | Docket: 64845369

Published

within the meaning of the definition of “victim,” § 775.089(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2002), in a penal statute,

I.M. v. State

917 So. 2d 927, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 19680

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 14, 2005 | Docket: 64841620

Published

for further proceedings in accordance with section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2004). Motion for Judgment

Walker v. State

919 So. 2d 501, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 18489, 2005 WL 3116467

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 23, 2005 | Docket: 64842016

Published

restitution to the insurance company under section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2001). We are not persuaded

Harris v. State

911 So. 2d 869, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 15366, 2005 WL 2372076

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 28, 2005 | Docket: 64840510

Published

in refusing to grant a restitution hearing. Section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (2001), requires the State

A.B. v. State

910 So. 2d 415, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 14767

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 21, 2005 | Docket: 64840318

Published

So.2d 535, 535 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); see also § 775.089(6), Fla. Stat. (2005). Moreover, restitution for

Raybon v. State

913 So. 2d 4, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 13867, 2005 WL 2105754

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 2, 2005 | Docket: 64840712

Published

award of restitution to Kretzer and Johnson. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes, which controls the imposition

C.T.H. v. State

905 So. 2d 1031, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 10529

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 8, 2005 | Docket: 64839479

Published

to the instant trespass charge. We agree. Section 775.089(l)(a)l and 2, Florida Statutes (2002) authorizes

CTH v. State

905 So. 2d 1031, 2005 WL 1583485

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 8, 2005 | Docket: 1711861

Published

to the instant trespass charge. We agree. Section 775.089(1)(a)1 and 2, Florida Statutes (2002) authorizes

Socorro v. State

901 So. 2d 940, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 6051, 2005 WL 991705

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 29, 2005 | Docket: 64838101

Published

damage to the victim and the crime proved. See § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2004); Bernard v. State, 859

Thomas v. State

899 So. 2d 1279, 2005 WL 954878

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 27, 2005 | Docket: 2565657

Published

responsible for restitution for that item. See § 775.089(1)(a)(1), Fla. Stat. (2003); Chapman v. State

State v. Shinall

899 So. 2d 1219, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 5460, 2005 WL 900597

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 20, 2005 | Docket: 64837835

Published

that we should enforce the requirements of section 775.089(l)(b)l„ Florida Statutes (2001): *1221If the

Balogac v. State

886 So. 2d 273, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 16670, 2004 WL 2482569

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 5, 2004 | Docket: 64834093

Published

incurred by the victim. The restitution statute, section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2003) provides in

S.M. v. State

881 So. 2d 78, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 12185

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 20, 2004 | Docket: 64832389

Published

substantial evidence to support the award.... Section 775.089 contemplates an evidentiary hearing when there

Payne v. State

873 So. 2d 621, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 7713, 2004 WL 1196080

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 2, 2004 | Docket: 64830726

Published

directly related to *622the criminal episode. See § 775.089(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (2001). We therefore reverse

Bass v. State

873 So. 2d 569, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 7365, 2004 WL 1159724

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 26, 2004 | Docket: 64830704

Published

which Bass was required to make restitution. See § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2000); Hector v. State, 784 So

J.R. v. State

857 So. 2d 983, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 16187, 2003 WL 22445489

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 29, 2003 | Docket: 64826145

Published

Glatzmayer, 789 So.2d 297, 301 (Fla.2001). Section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2001), provides in

Rader v. State

858 So. 2d 1109, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 16000, 2003 WL 22415390

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 24, 2003 | Docket: 64826382

Published

payment of the restitution should be clarified. See § 775.089(3), Fla. Stat. (1989). Affirmed in part, reversed

Perry v. State

852 So. 2d 938, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 12833, 2003 WL 22012666

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 27, 2003 | Docket: 64824450

Published

insurance company and $248.40 to the credit union. Section 775.089(l)(a)(l), Florida Statutes (2001), provides

J.D. v. State

849 So. 2d 458, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 10812

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 16, 2003 | Docket: 64823970

Published

or indirectly by the defendant’s offense,” section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2001), and the court

Hollingsworth v. State

835 So. 2d 373, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 731, 2003 WL 183330

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 29, 2003 | Docket: 64820090

Published

“victim” for purposes of the restitution statute, section 775.089, Fla. Stat. We distinguish these cases and

Hollingsworth v. State

835 So. 2d 373, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 731, 2003 WL 183330

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 29, 2003 | Docket: 64820090

Published

“victim” for purposes of the restitution statute, section 775.089, Fla. Stat. We distinguish these cases and

Bogert v. State

834 So. 2d 392, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 288, 2003 WL 131594

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 17, 2003 | Docket: 64819875

Published

for articles not alleged in the information. Section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes,3 allows the trial

Mason v. State

824 So. 2d 338, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 12410, 2002 WL 1972417

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 28, 2002 | Docket: 64817089

Published

Okeechobee County Fire Rescue. Pursuant to section 775.089(l)(c), Florida Statutes (1997), Okeechobee

McElrath v. State

821 So. 2d 1210, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 10672, 2002 WL 1723663

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 26, 2002 | Docket: 64816556

Published

regarding restitution was substantively correct. Section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2001), authorizes

State v. Williams

805 So. 2d 1082, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 959, 2002 WL 126071

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 1, 2002 | Docket: 64812041

Published

provide a basis for a restitution award. See § 775.089(2)(a)3., Fla. Stat. (2000); Vanlieu v. State,

Smith v. State

801 So. 2d 1043, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 18013, 2001 WL 1635480

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 21, 2001 | Docket: 64810826

Published

restitution by a preponderance of the evidence. See § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (1999). Here, there was no evidence

C.S.H. v. State

785 So. 2d 651, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 6148, 2001 WL 483982

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 9, 2001 | Docket: 64805457

Published

$2,566.32 was not a “loss” as required by section 775.089(1), Florida Statutes (1997). That section provides

State v. M.K.

786 So. 2d 24, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 5560

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 26, 2001 | Docket: 64805660

Published

appeal from “an order denying restitution under section 775.089 .” Counsel for the child contends that section

Oliver v. State

788 So. 2d 1017, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 2431, 2001 WL 220063

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 7, 2001 | Docket: 64806540

Published

of loss to be compensated for by restitution. § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (1997); Lunsford v. State, 637

McLeod v. State

773 So. 2d 1169, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 14888, 2000 WL 1700146

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 15, 2000 | Docket: 64802532

Published

or indirectly by the defendant’s offense. See § 775.089(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (1999). Because McLeod and Badcock

P.H. v. State

774 So. 2d 728, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 13823

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 27, 2000 | Docket: 64802732

Published

restitution definition of victim, and we agree. Section 775.089(l)(c), Florida Statutes (1997), defines the

E.M. v. State

761 So. 2d 1177, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 8066, 2000 WL 827191

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 28, 2000 | Docket: 64798512

Published

open the possibility of a civil remedy under section 775.089(5). AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART. STONE

State v. Hurst

764 So. 2d 652, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 5725, 2000 WL 574469

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 15, 2000 | Docket: 64799394

Published

related to the defendant’s criminal episode. See § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (1999). A trial court may properly

Graham v. State

779 So. 2d 370, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 5564, 2000 WL 571403

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 12, 2000 | Docket: 64804131

Published

will be considered as a part of every sentence. § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (1997); see Dailey v. State

Hamilton v. State

753 So. 2d 743, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 3399, 2000 WL 293788

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 22, 2000 | Docket: 64795963

Published

hearing is the preponderance of the evidence. See § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (1997). The evidence was legally

T.K. v. State

743 So. 2d 1197, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 14626, 1999 WL 999749

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 5, 1999 | Docket: 64791937

Published

under the criminal code and thus, pursuant to section 775.089, restitution includes not only damages caused

McIntosh v. State

741 So. 2d 644, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 13206, 1999 WL 817810

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 6, 1999 | Docket: 64791108

Published

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See § 775.089, Fla. Stat. (1997); Glaubius v. State, 688 So.2d 913 (Fla.1997)

Sam v. State

741 So. 2d 1247, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 13162, 1999 WL 790663

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 6, 1999 | Docket: 64791249

Published

that term is used in the restitution statute, section 775.089(l)(c), Florida Statutes (1997). See Rodriguez

R.D. v. State

743 So. 2d 1124, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 12186, 1999 WL 743584

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 14, 1999 | Docket: 64791893

Published

establishing the amount of restitution pursuant to section 775.089(l)(a), Fla.Stat. (1997), was entered more than

White v. State

736 So. 2d 1226, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 7881, 1999 WL 391647

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 16, 1999 | Docket: 64789375

Published

reduced the unpaid amount to a judgment, see § 775.089(3), Fla. Stat. (1997). Ms. White does not challenge

O'CONNELL v. State

733 So. 2d 556, 1999 WL 236185

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 23, 1999 | Docket: 1659958

Published

that no additional damages were incurred. Section 775.089 requires restitution for all direct and indirect

Wanner v. State

746 So. 2d 478, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 4547, 1999 WL 199501

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 9, 1999 | Docket: 64792827

Published

restitution purposes as defined in Florida Statutes § 775.089. As such, SOUTHTRUST is entitled to proportional

Montes v. State

723 So. 2d 881, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 15860, 1998 WL 877503

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 17, 1998 | Docket: 64785280

Published

after his probation had expired. We agree. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1995), provides: *882(3)(a)

Mastrantoni v. State

722 So. 2d 251, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 15630, 1998 WL 852304

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 11, 1998 | Docket: 64784908

Published

theft auto, and grand theft third-degree. . Section 775.089, Florida Statutes provides that in addition

Powell v. State

724 So. 2d 1207, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 14861, 1999 WL 2614

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 25, 1998 | Docket: 64785838

Published

was pending, the trial court, pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1993), entered a written

Graham v. State

720 So. 2d 294, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 14049, 1998 WL 769808

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 6, 1998 | Docket: 64784102

Published

provide a basis for a restitution award. See § 775.089(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1995). However, if the amount

L.O. v. State

718 So. 2d 155, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 445, 1998 Fla. LEXIS 1681

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 10, 1998 | Docket: 64783150

Published

2d at 472-73.6 A prime concern underlying section 775.089 is twofold: to give the perpetrator of a crime

A.J.N. v. State

715 So. 2d 1171, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 11011, 1998 WL 543279

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 28, 1998 | Docket: 64782200

Published

damages by a preponderance of the evidence. See § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (1997); Strickland v. State, 685

A.G. v. State

718 So. 2d 854, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 10847

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 26, 1998 | Docket: 64783388

Published

of Florida, which amended Florida Statute section 775.089(l)(a) by adding the italized language below:

Cyrus v. State

712 So. 2d 811, 1998 WL 348511

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 1, 1998 | Docket: 419825

Published

discretion in the restitution order, we affirm. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1995), authorizes a trial

State v. Banks

712 So. 2d 1165, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 6641, 1998 WL 372469

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 12, 1998 | Docket: 64781589

Published

light of the fact that effective May 8, 1995, section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes, was amended to provide

Jackson v. State

711 So. 2d 602, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 5051, 1998 WL 219754

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 6, 1998 | Docket: 64781141

Published

Jackson to pay Mr. Gollett $51,000. We reverse. Section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1997) provides for

Garay v. State

708 So. 2d 631, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 2776, 1998 WL 121561

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 20, 1998 | Docket: 64779937

Published

. § 812.014(2)(c)(l), Fla. Stat. (1993). . § 775.089(l)(a)l, Fla. Stat. (1993).

S.P. v. State

705 So. 2d 124, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 548, 1998 WL 23222

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 23, 1998 | Docket: 64778630

Published

of potential future financial resources. See § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (1995). We agree that the record

Peters v. State

704 So. 2d 736, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 251, 1998 WL 11790

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 16, 1998 | Docket: 64778374

Published

forth in the current restitution statute, section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1995), is even more

Vereen v. State

703 So. 2d 1193, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 14360, 1998 WL 25615

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 24, 1997 | Docket: 64777935

Published

subcontractors were “victims” within the meaning of section 775.089(l)(e), Florida Statutes (1995). The fact that

Cotton v. State

703 So. 2d 1160, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 13665, 1997 WL 777837

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 10, 1997 | Docket: 64777923

Published

payments pursuant to the plea bargain and section 775.089(3)(b) and (6), Florida Statutes (1995). DANAHY

Anderson v. State

703 So. 2d 1105, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 12542, 1997 WL 689500

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 7, 1997 | Docket: 64777899

Published

the $500 “rough estimate” for gas and time. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1995), provides that the

D.J.R. v. State

701 So. 2d 383, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 12251

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 5, 1997 | Docket: 64776734

Published

episode, we reverse the restitution order. Section 775.089(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (1995) states: [T]he court

DJR v. State

701 So. 2d 383, 1997 WL 683305

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 5, 1997 | Docket: 1736687

Published

episode, we reverse the restitution order. Section 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (1995) states: [T]he court

Finch v. State

696 So. 2d 1304, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 8176, 1997 WL 398860

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 16, 1997 | Docket: 64775055

Published

pursuant to section 775.089(5), Florida Statutes. The applicable version of section 775.089(5) reads: “An

J.K. v. State

695 So. 2d 868, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 6700

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 18, 1997 | Docket: 64774346

Published

restitution as part of adult probation, where section 775.089 imposes no duty on the trial court to make

Broecker v. State

696 So. 2d 869, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 5632, 1997 WL 270617

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 23, 1997 | Docket: 64774846

Published

hearing to consider the factors listed in section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (Supp.1992). Finally,

Drye v. State

691 So. 2d 1168, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 3988, 1997 WL 186271

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 18, 1997 | Docket: 64772547

Published

facility that performed the examination. See, e.g., § 775.089(2)(a)l, Fla. Stat. (1995); Gladfelter v. State

Owens v. State

691 So. 2d 41, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 3161, 1997 WL 154769

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 4, 1997 | Docket: 64772266

Published

We remand for procedures in accordance with section 775.089, Florida Statutes. We affirm as to appellant’s

State v. Williams

689 So. 2d 1233, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 2402, 1997 WL 114927

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 14, 1997 | Docket: 64771820

Published

the amount of the loss sustained by any victim. § 775.089(6)(a), Fla. Stat. (1995). Additionally, the statute

J.O.S. v. State

689 So. 2d 1061, 22 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 118, 1997 Fla. LEXIS 308

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 13, 1997 | Docket: 64771769

Published

restitution which a court may do in its discretion.5 Section 775.089 is a restitution statute which is part of Florida’s

State v. Nagurney

687 So. 2d 336, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 379, 1997 WL 43865

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 5, 1997 | Docket: 64770691

Published

right to restitution. See § 775.089(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (1995). Section 775.089(l)(a) provides that the trial

Ibrahim v. State

687 So. 2d 914, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 296, 1997 WL 30928

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 29, 1997 | Docket: 64771071

Published

hearing evidenced that it intended to follow section 775.089(3)(b)2, Florida Statutes (1995), by requiring

C.A. v. State

685 So. 2d 1036, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 120

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 15, 1997 | Docket: 64770209

Published

than entering a written order. We disagree. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1995), and the cases interpreting

Parker v. State

682 So. 2d 702, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 11951

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 13, 1996 | Docket: 64768781

Published

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. § 775.089, Fla. Stat. (1989).

Weisman v. State

681 So. 2d 1189, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 10874, 1996 WL 595180

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 18, 1996 | Docket: 64768544

Published

directly or indirectly by the defendant’s offense.” § 775.089(1), Fla. Stat. (1989). Additionally, the loss

Glaubius v. State

675 So. 2d 211, 1996 WL 293629

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 5, 1996 | Docket: 64765253

Published

constitute a proper item for restitution under section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1993), we affirm. At the

M.F. v. State

673 So. 2d 571, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 5172, 1996 WL 271563

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 22, 1996 | Docket: 64764602

Published

value of the broken window ($125 or 12.5 hours). § 775.089(7), Fla.Stat. (1993). Thus, we reverse for the

Williams v. State

673 So. 2d 908, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 4708, 1996 WL 238509

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 10, 1996 | Docket: 64764721

Published

v. State, 648 So.2d 274 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); § 775.089(6), Fla.Stat. (1993). The state, however, argues

Taylor v. State

672 So. 2d 605, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 4294, 1996 WL 194389

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 24, 1996 | Docket: 64764067

Published

agency does not meet the definition of a “victim.” § 775.089, Fla.Stat. (1995); Staudt v. State, 616 So.2d

Wetherington v. State

672 So. 2d 586, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 3918, 1996 WL 185671

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 19, 1996 | Docket: 64764062

Published

by any victim as a result of the offense.” Section 775.089(6)(a), Florida Statutes (1995). (Emphasis added)

Sperry v. State

671 So. 2d 856, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 3848, 1996 WL 179967

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 17, 1996 | Docket: 64763877

Published

restitution immediately is reasonable because section 775.089(3)(c), which requires that restitution be made

J.O.S. v. State

668 So. 2d 1082, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 1923

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 5, 1996 | Docket: 64762756

Published

related to the defendant’s criminal episode.... § 775.089(l)(a), Fla.Stat. (Supp.1994) (emphasis added)

Elder v. State

668 So. 2d 332, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 1557, 1996 WL 72285

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 21, 1996 | Docket: 64762476

Published

issue and remand for further proceedings under section 775.089, Fla.Stat. BOOTH, JOANOS and WOLF, JJ., concur

V.I. v. State

667 So. 2d 439, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 412, 1996 WL 26962

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 24, 1996 | Docket: 64761994

Published

judgment in a civil action, as provided in section 775.089(5), Florida Statutes (Supp.1992). REVERSED

Harris v. State

664 So. 2d 1181, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 13510, 1995 WL 765285

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 29, 1995 | Docket: 64760989

Published

restitution to the victim’s sibling, is reversed. § 775.089(l)(c); Catoe v. State, 618 So.2d 784 (Fla. 5th

Ronan v. State

666 So. 2d 205, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 13196, 1995 WL 755567

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 22, 1995 | Docket: 64761310

Published

victim of the offense is on the state attorney. § 775.089(7), Fla.Stat. (1993). Because the state failed

Williams v. State

663 So. 2d 15, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 12493, 1995 WL 700234

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 29, 1995 | Docket: 64760257

Published

exceed the length of defendant’s probation. See § 775.089(3)(b)l., Fla.Stat. (1993); Starks v. State, 658

State v. C.W.

662 So. 2d 768, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 11965, 1995 WL 676079

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 15, 1995 | Docket: 64760096

Published

appeal an order denying restitution under section 775.089, see § 924.07(l)(k), Fla.Stat. (1993), enacted

Starks v. State

658 So. 2d 183, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 8269, 1995 WL 453990

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 2, 1995 | Docket: 64757947

Published

violation of the mandate in section 775.089(3), Florida Statutes (1993). Section 775.089 provides, inter alia:

Weeks v. State

659 So. 2d 695, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 8192, 1995 WL 455438

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 2, 1995 | Docket: 64758464

Published

hearing or striking the restitution provision. See § 775.089(6), Fla.Stat. (1991); Filmore v. State, 656 So

Faddis v. State

657 So. 2d 88, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 7786, 1995 WL 427724

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 21, 1995 | Docket: 64757551

Published

remaining offense for which defendant was convicted); § 775.089(l)(b)2, Fla.Stat. (1993). HARRIS, GRIFFIN and

Bain v. State

655 So. 2d 1321, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 6369, 1995 WL 353552

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 14, 1995 | Docket: 64756724

Published

lack of financial resources as required under section 775.089(6), Fla.Stat. (1993),1 the record shows that

Cabrera v. State

655 So. 2d 182, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 5335, 1995 WL 296330

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 17, 1995 | Docket: 64756452

Published

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. § 775.089(l)(a), Fla.Stat. (1991).

Rinaldo v. State

653 So. 2d 1143, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 4849, 1995 WL 253929

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 3, 1995 | Docket: 64755804

Published

the court-imposed restitution requirement. See § 775.089(1)(a), Fla.Stat. (1993). AFFIRMED but REMANDED

Fabregat v. State

651 So. 2d 826, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 2572, 1995 WL 108951

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 15, 1995 | Docket: 64754898

Published

independent restitution order pursuant to Section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (Supp. 1994) and, as

Longshore v. State

655 So. 2d 1139, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 2364, 1995 WL 96323

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 10, 1995 | Docket: 64756655

Published

supports restitution. Williams, 520 So.2d at 277; § 775.089(l)(b)2, Fla.Stat. (1993). William M. Longshore

Duby v. State

651 So. 2d 800, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 2296, 1995 WL 93827

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 9, 1995 | Docket: 64754875

Published

of grand theft and dealing in stolen property. § 775.089(l)(a), (6) & (7), Fla.Stat. (1991) (restitution

Coleman v. State

651 So. 2d 239, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 2066, 1995 WL 84563

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 3, 1995 | Docket: 64754643

Published

restitution prior to imposing such an order. See § 775.089(6), Fla.Stat. (1993); Burch v. State, 617 So.2d

Barclay v. State

651 So. 2d 218, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 1945, 1995 WL 79928

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 1, 1995 | Docket: 64754633

Published

present and future ability to pay restitution.2 See § 775.089(6) & (7), Fla. Stat. (1993). See and compare Oliverio

Barclay v. State

651 So. 2d 218, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 1945, 1995 WL 79928

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 1, 1995 | Docket: 64754633

Published

present and future ability to pay restitution.2 See § 775.089(6) & (7), Fla. Stat. (1993). See and compare Oliverio

Romano v. State

648 So. 2d 329, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 443, 1995 WL 25696

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 25, 1995 | Docket: 64753293

Published

no restitution hearing was conducted. See section 775.089(6) and (7), Fla.Stat. (1993); Johnson v. State

Bowen v. State

646 So. 2d 305, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 12458, 1994 WL 708210

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 22, 1994 | Docket: 64752547

Published

directly or indirectly by the defendant’s offense. § 775.089(l)(a), Fla.Stat. (1991). JUDGMENT and SENTENCE

Brown v. State

645 So. 2d 1066, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 11511, 1994 WL 652844

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 22, 1994 | Docket: 64752353

Published

properly considered the factors set forth in section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1991), and that it was

Milton v. State

644 So. 2d 143, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 10118, 1994 WL 575464

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 21, 1994 | Docket: 64751599

Published

included in the $4,310.74 restitution amount. Section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1991), provides for

C.W. v. State

645 So. 2d 26, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 10009, 1994 WL 567737

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 19, 1994 | Docket: 64752143

Published

require the parent to pay restitution under section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1991), which requires

Moore v. State

643 So. 2d 2, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 8005, 1994 WL 419077

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 12, 1994 | Docket: 64751209

Published

v. State, 616 So.2d 1124 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); § 775.089(7), Fla.Stat. (1991). Although the state asserts

Haight v. State

640 So. 2d 1170, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 6822, 1994 WL 328287

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 12, 1994 | Docket: 64750034

Published

latter portion of the sentence was error.1 Section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1991), requires the

McCray v. State

639 So. 2d 693, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 6632, 1994 WL 321712

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 8, 1994 | Docket: 64749646

Published

The court, pursuant to the requirement of section 775.-089(2), Florida Statutes (1993), assessed restitution

Starr Tyme, Inc. v. Cohen

638 So. 2d 599, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 6135, 1994 WL 275641

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 22, 1994 | Docket: 64749207

Published

has been “convicted” under the provisions of section 775.089(8) even in the absence of an adjudication.

George v. State

636 So. 2d 170, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 4092, 1994 WL 151374

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 27, 1994 | Docket: 64748148

Published

proposed by the state, or to withdraw her plea. Section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (1991), places the burden

R.H. v. State

634 So. 2d 321, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 3289, 1994 WL 113632

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 7, 1994 | Docket: 64747186

Published

(1991); § 39.054, Fla.Stat. (Supp.1992); contrast § 775.089(12)(a)1, Fla. Stat. (Supp.1992). BOOTH, ALLEN

Arnett v. State

633 So. 2d 1206, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 3095, 1994 WL 107210

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 31, 1994 | Docket: 64747066

Published

State v. Sanderson, 625 So.2d 471 (Fla.1993); § 775.089(3)(b)(2), Fla.Stat. (1991). DAUKSCH, GRIFFIN and

Medina v. State

633 So. 2d 578, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 3019, 1994 WL 101296

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 30, 1994 | Docket: 64746953

Published

imposed restitution upon appellant pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1991). However, there was

Ashlock v. State

632 So. 2d 213, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 1204, 1994 WL 46924

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 18, 1994 | Docket: 64746480

Published

probation officer, must set the payment schedule. § 775.089(3)(c), Fla.Stat. (1991). REVERSED and REMANDED

Gonzalez v. State

630 So. 2d 1247, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 1032, 1994 WL 27301

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 2, 1994 | Docket: 64746035

Published

A restitution hearing in accordance with section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1991), shall be conducted

Helfant v. State

630 So. 2d 672, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 146, 1994 WL 10813

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 19, 1994 | Docket: 64745865

Published

the interest. Restitution is authorized by section 775.-089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1991), which provides:

J.M.G. v. State

629 So. 2d 1081, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 62

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 12, 1994 | Docket: 64745427

Published

counterpart for adult offenders, section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes. Section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes

Kirkland v. State

629 So. 2d 1057, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 12901, 19 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 72

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 30, 1993 | Docket: 64745412

Published

them the location where he can locate them.” Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1991) requires a sentencing

Leverock v. State

627 So. 2d 1354, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 12910, 1993 WL 540160

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 30, 1993 | Docket: 64744731

Published

absence of ability to pay rests with the defendant. § 775.089(7), Fla.Stat. (1993). See also Driggers v. State

Burrell v. State

626 So. 2d 1065, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 11434, 1993 WL 461966

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 10, 1993 | Docket: 64744071

Published

jeopardized by vacating the theft conviction. Under section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1991), a sentencing

Dickson v. State

622 So. 2d 179, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 8452, 1993 WL 309168

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 13, 1993 | Docket: 64698069

Published

awarded as restitution. We disagree because section 775.-089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1989) provides for

Padilla v. State

622 So. 2d 160, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 8338, 1993 WL 302783

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 11, 1993 | Docket: 64698052

Published

to first conduct a hearing as required by section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes. See also Denmark v. State

State v. Ashley

621 So. 2d 743, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 6735, 1993 WL 221406

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 25, 1993 | Docket: 64697785

Published

to point out that the restitution statute, section 775.089(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1989), as interpreted

Catoe v. State

618 So. 2d 784, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 5547, 1993 WL 167707

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 21, 1993 | Docket: 64696437

Published

restitution to the victim’s family. We agree. Section 775.089(l)(c), Florida Statutes (1991) states: (c)

S.E.G. v. State

618 So. 2d 345, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 5358, 1993 WL 154272

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 14, 1993 | Docket: 64696262

Published

in which she was a passenger. We reverse. Section 775.089(1), Florida Statutes (1991) provides that a

Boykin v. State

617 So. 2d 823, 18 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 1167

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 3, 1993 | Docket: 64695896

Published

restitution to the victim in the amount of $100.00. Section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes, provides in part:

Deangelus v. State

614 So. 2d 1194, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 2242, 1993 WL 48236

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 26, 1993 | Docket: 64694737

Published

23 in restitution ordered by the trial court. § 775.089(7), Fla.Stat. (1989); Boss v. State, 613 So.2d

Mallard v. State

609 So. 2d 178, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 12619, 1992 WL 371551

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 18, 1992 | Docket: 64692312

Published

determining Mallard’s ability to pay, as required by section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1991). We agree and reverse

Wenner v. State

610 So. 2d 80, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 12412, 1992 WL 362130

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 11, 1992 | Docket: 64692741

Published

reasons not to impose restitution as required by section 775.-089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1989), the order

Smith v. State

613 So. 2d 1325, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 10406, 1992 WL 388980

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 1, 1992 | Docket: 64694364

Published

non-payment of restitution. Under the provisions of section 775.-089(l)(a) and (b), Florida Statutes (1991), the

Critton v. State

604 So. 2d 933, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 10004, 1992 WL 230408

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 21, 1992 | Docket: 64669585

Published

of a restitution order in accordance with section 775.-089(l)(a), Florida Statutes, may make the sentence

Gregg v. State

602 So. 2d 996, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 8921, 1992 WL 193007

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 13, 1992 | Docket: 64669100

Published

remand the case for a hearing pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1989). On remand, restitution

State v. Peters

604 So. 2d 539, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 8637, 1992 WL 191296

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 12, 1992 | Docket: 64669507

Published

conduct a restitu*541tion hearing pursuant to section 775.089 et seq., Florida Statutes (1991).1 REVERSED

Miller v. State

603 So. 2d 114, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 8399, 1992 WL 184006

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 5, 1992 | Docket: 64669216

Published

to pay the amount assessed as restitution, section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1989); Pellot v. State

Schlosser v. State

602 So. 2d 628, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 7460, 17 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 1687

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 8, 1992 | Docket: 64668991

Published

toward satisfaction of the restitution order. See § 775.089(ll)(b), Fla.Stat. (1989). The circuit court granted

Dixon v. State

601 So. 2d 606, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 6520, 1992 WL 134838

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 19, 1992 | Docket: 64668664

Published

two years old.1 This argument lacks merit. Section 775.089(1)(a), (6), Florida Statutes (1991) provides

Bautista v. State

600 So. 2d 1255, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 6541, 1992 WL 135046

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 17, 1992 | Docket: 64668549

Published

v. State, 591 So.2d 1085 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); § 775.089(6), Fla.Stat. (1991). See also Peters v. State

Suggs v. State

600 So. 2d 549, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 6529, 1992 WL 135044

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 17, 1992 | Docket: 64668024

Published

defendant’s assault upon Levy and Sabitini. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1991) provides, “[T]he court

Clarke v. State

600 So. 2d 510, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 6236, 1992 WL 123492

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 9, 1992 | Docket: 64668002

Published

571 So.2d 571, 573 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); see also § 775.089(6), Fla.Stat. (1991). Defendant’s other points

Osborne v. State

599 So. 2d 758, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 6197, 1992 WL 119844

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 3, 1992 | Docket: 64667746

Published

refusing to consider defendant’s ability to pay. See § 775.089(6), Fla.Stat. (1991); Cheatham v. State, 593 So

Uribe v. State

596 So. 2d 768, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 3871, 1992 WL 63474

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 3, 1992 | Docket: 64666543

Published

trial court might wish to consider whether section 775.089(5), Florida Statutes (1991) is appropriate

Burke v. State

596 So. 2d 484, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 2817, 1992 WL 55284

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 25, 1992 | Docket: 64666378

Published

authority to order restitution pursuant to section 775.-089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1991). The statute

Bianco v. State

594 So. 2d 861, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 1886, 1992 WL 38340

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 4, 1992 | Docket: 64665567

Published

Fresneda v. State, 347 So.2d 1021 (Fla.1977); § 775.089, Fla.Stat. (1989). As for the sum due to Jill

Battles v. State

593 So. 2d 587, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 920, 1992 WL 21080

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 7, 1992 | Docket: 64665268

Published

who purchased the stolen property from him. Section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1989), provides that

J.R. v. State

592 So. 2d 1253, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 908, 1992 WL 20023

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 5, 1992 | Docket: 64664866

Published

to the offenses to which she pleaded guilty. § 775.089(l)(a), Fla.Stat. (1989); State v. Williams, 520

Salvador v. State

601 So. 2d 227, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 639, 1992 WL 16023

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 29, 1992 | Docket: 64668605

Published

conjunction with the causation required by section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1989). As the First

Williams v. State

591 So. 2d 664, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 12658, 1991 WL 272638

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 20, 1991 | Docket: 64664300

Published

court did not err in its order of restitution. Section 775.089(7), Fla.Stat. (1989); Godwin v. State, 586

Jones v. State

590 So. 2d 1061, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 12537, 1991 WL 269755

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 18, 1991 | Docket: 64663962

Published

sentence. Restitution is part of a sentence. Section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1983). This court

Durand v. State

590 So. 2d 505, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 11982, 1991 WL 253833

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 4, 1991 | Docket: 64663732

Published

medical expenses under the restitution statute, section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1989). We find that, under

Gourley v. State

590 So. 2d 482, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 11946, 1991 WL 253378

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 26, 1991 | Docket: 64663723

Published

“directly or indirectly by the defendant’s offense.” § 775.089(l)(a), Fla.Stat. (1989). There must be a significant

Laster v. State

587 So. 2d 674, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 10735, 1991 WL 216523

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 25, 1991 | Docket: 64662335

Published

case is remanded for a hearing pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Stat*675utes (1989). In all other

Small v. State

587 So. 2d 597, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 9996, 1991 WL 200773

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 10, 1991 | Docket: 64662298

Published

the restitution order was permissible under section 775.089(1), Florida Statutes (1987), which permits

Godwin v. State

586 So. 2d 1257, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 9562, 1991 WL 191613

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 25, 1991 | Docket: 64662128

Published

to establish an inability to make restitution. § 775.089(7), Fla.Stat. (1989); Goble v. State, 568 So.2d

Pingel v. State

584 So. 2d 155, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 7775, 16 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 2107

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 9, 1991 | Docket: 64660845

Published

denying Pingel’s motion correctly found that section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (1987) places the burden

State v. MacLeod

583 So. 2d 701, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 5890, 1991 WL 109691

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 21, 1991 | Docket: 64660634

Published

legislative intent of Florida’s restitution statute, § 775.-089, Fla.Stat. (1989), were analyzed and discussed

Daniels v. State

581 So. 2d 970, 1991 WL 105615

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 20, 1991 | Docket: 1283894

Published

subject of restitution in criminal cases. Section 775.089(3)(a), Florida Statutes, in effect provides

Wilcox v. State

579 So. 2d 148, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2689, 1991 WL 77628

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 29, 1991 | Docket: 64658581

Published

court entered a restitution order pursuant to Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1989), requiring appellant

Haynes v. State

575 So. 2d 1341, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 1606, 1991 WL 27208

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 26, 1991 | Docket: 64657051

Published

award to have been specifically authorized by section 775.089(2)(c), Florida Statutes. However, we reverse

Wells v. State

573 So. 2d 1014, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 739, 1991 WL 10404

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 31, 1991 | Docket: 64656060

Published

sustained by a victim as a result of the offense. § 775.089(7), Fla.Stat. (1989). The appellant admitted to

Critsley v. State

573 So. 2d 167, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 197, 1991 WL 2771

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 16, 1991 | Docket: 64655883

Published

amount of that expense is $1,226.48. Under section 775.089(2)(d), Florida Statutes (1989), such an expense

Christenson v. State

571 So. 2d 103, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9535, 1990 WL 205853

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 18, 1990 | Docket: 64654974

Published

that the trial court had the authority under Section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1989), to order the

Haines v. State

571 So. 2d 70, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9468, 1990 WL 205353

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 11, 1990 | Docket: 64654960

Published

sufficient to pay restitution is upon the defendant. § 775.089(7), F.S. (1989). Because appellant failed to present

Pulwicz v. State

571 So. 2d 65, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9209, 1990 WL 197966

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 10, 1990 | Docket: 64654954

Published

was caused by the defendant’s offense. See Section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (1987). Accordingly, we

Rogers v. Publix Super Markets, Inc.

575 So. 2d 214, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9139, 1990 WL 192307

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 6, 1990 | Docket: 64656578

Published

restitution in favor of the crime victim pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Statutes. AFFIRMED and REMANDED. DAUKSCH

Goble v. State

568 So. 2d 91, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 7999, 1990 WL 154748

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 11, 1990 | Docket: 64653755

Published

1st DCA 1990), this court held: Although Section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1988 Supp.), requires

Bishop v. State

564 So. 2d 629, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 5691, 1990 WL 108838

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 2, 1990 | Docket: 64651904

Published

State, 532 So.2d 71 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). See also § 775.089(7), Fla.Stat. (1989). However, we note a discrepancy

Gentry v. State

564 So. 2d 211, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 5098, 1990 WL 98455

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 10, 1990 | Docket: 64651638

Published

property as a condition of probation under section 775.089 should be based on the fair market value of

Reeves v. State

560 So. 2d 1368, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 3192, 1990 WL 59191

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 10, 1990 | Docket: 64650372

Published

apparently was in the amount of $40. While section 775.-089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1987), requires a

Christian v. State

559 So. 2d 448, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 2531, 1990 WL 43129

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 12, 1990 | Docket: 64649559

Published

restitution, however, is a different matter. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes, provides that restitution

Dickens v. State

560 So. 2d 1222, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 2045, 1990 WL 33516

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 28, 1990 | Docket: 64650344

Published

appellant’s ability to pay as required by section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1987). We agree and reverse

Vorce v. State

557 So. 2d 201, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1092, 1990 WL 15914

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 21, 1990 | Docket: 64648457

Published

is entitled to notice and a hearing under section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1987). If the defendant

G.C. v. State

560 So. 2d 1186, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 564, 1990 WL 6486

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 30, 1990 | Docket: 64650332

Published

in order to support an order of restitution, § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (1987), the order must be reversed

Ridgeway v. State

555 So. 2d 960, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 487, 1990 WL 5398

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 24, 1990 | Docket: 64647614

Published

not considered in the sentencing guidelines. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes. Pursuant to Rule 9.315(b)

Wightman v. State

555 So. 2d 896, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 102, 1990 WL 949

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 9, 1990 | Docket: 64647577

Published

amount of restitution against the defendant. § 775.089(1)(a), Fla.Stat. (1987). See Spivey v. State,

Moton v. State

554 So. 2d 657, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 7429, 1989 WL 156403

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 29, 1989 | Docket: 64647272

Published

the unre-covered property in any other way. Section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes, authorizes restitution

DeJessa v. State

553 So. 2d 802, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 7276, 1989 WL 155473

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 26, 1989 | Docket: 64646984

Published

of the restitution issue in accordance with Section 775.089(6), Florida Statute (1987) and Ballance v.

Springs v. State

553 So. 2d 279, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2760, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6673, 1989 WL 142663

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 28, 1989 | Docket: 64646782

Published

injuries pursuant to section 775.-089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1985). Section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes

Shields v. State

549 So. 2d 246, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2297, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 5322, 1989 WL 112133

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 27, 1989 | Docket: 64645195

Published

Appellant contends this was error, citing section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1987); Amison v. State

In the Interest of F.J.O. v. State

548 So. 2d 306, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2126, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4954, 1989 WL 102518

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 8, 1989 | Docket: 64644651

Published

to carry its burden of proof in this case. Section 775.089 provides, in pertinent part: (7) Any dispute

Cogdell v. State

547 So. 2d 256, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1778, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4223, 1989 WL 82153

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 27, 1989 | Docket: 64644168

Published

on the ground that the restitution statute, section 775.089, Florida Statutes, had been significantly changed

Gibson v. State

541 So. 2d 761, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 951, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 1959, 1989 WL 34835

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 12, 1989 | Docket: 64641607

Published

court’s restitution order is controlled by section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1985). That statute

Nordgren v. State

538 So. 2d 552, 1989 WL 13139

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 22, 1989 | Docket: 64640404

Published

the amount of the installments is excessive. Section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1987), authorizes a court

Durrett v. State

530 So. 2d 483, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2052, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 3926, 1988 WL 91209

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 1, 1988 | Docket: 64636727

Published

necessary causal relationship required by Section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1985), is satisfied

Tucker v. State

529 So. 2d 818, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1917, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 3672, 1988 WL 84223

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 12, 1988 | Docket: 64636406

Published

indirectly caused by the appellant’s offense. Section 775.089, F.S. Third, the PSI contained in the record

Interest of D.N. v. State

529 So. 2d 1217, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1828, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 3601

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 4, 1988 | Docket: 64636482

Published

final point on appeal, appellant argues that section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1987), the statute

Gordon v. State

524 So. 2d 1047, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 849, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 1323

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 30, 1988 | Docket: 64634711

Published

the restitution statute applies to his case. § 775.089, Fla.Stat. (1983); Scurry v. State, 490 So.2d

Gomez v. State

521 So. 2d 333, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 647, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 908, 1988 WL 18689

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 9, 1988 | Docket: 64633178

Published

Spivey held: Prior to the 1984 amendment, section 775.089(1), Florida Statutes (1983) provided that the

Jarawdi v. State

521 So. 2d 261, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 606, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 828

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 2, 1988 | Docket: 64633144

Published

pay the restitution amount, as required by section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1987). We agree and remand

Martinez v. State

516 So. 2d 59, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2761, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 11310, 1987 WL 2119

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 2, 1987 | Docket: 64631204

Published

without complying with the requirements of section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1985), in imposing court

Greenfield v. State

511 So. 2d 751, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2089, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 10042

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 28, 1987 | Docket: 64629013

Published

on the ground that the restitution statute, section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1985), was enacted in 1977

State v. Duffer

509 So. 2d 1326, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1748, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 9392

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 17, 1987 | Docket: 64628440

Published

the court had not yet ordered restitution, section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1985), provides that the

Heslar v. State

508 So. 2d 527, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1453, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 8894

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 11, 1987 | Docket: 64627840

Published

or indirectly by appellant’s criminal offense. § 775.089(1)(a), F.S. (1985). AFFIRMED in part and REVERSED

Warzybok v. State

505 So. 2d 507, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 829, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 7285

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 20, 1987 | Docket: 64626401

Published

insurance company is not a “victim” as defined in section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1985). We disagree. This

Casler v. State

502 So. 2d 1374, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 644, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 7010

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 27, 1987 | Docket: 64625288

Published

DCA 1985), argues that the 1984 amendment to section 775.089, Florida Statutes, provides for restitution

McGarry v. State

496 So. 2d 138, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 571, 1986 Fla. LEXIS 2781

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 30, 1986 | Docket: 64622336

Published

be approved unless based on valid grounds. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1983), concerns restitution

Hudson v. State

496 So. 2d 888, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2216, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 10212

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 17, 1986 | Docket: 64622625

Published

concerning restitution in effect at the time was section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1983). This court has consistently

Scurry v. State

490 So. 2d 223, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1442

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 25, 1986 | Docket: 1488799

Published

court did err in imposing restitution under section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1983), without notice and

Thomas v. State

480 So. 2d 158, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2780, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 17295

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 17, 1985 | Docket: 64616248

Published

03(l)(e), Florida Statutes (1983)1 *160and Section 775.089(2), Florida Statutes (1983).2 These provisions

Gibbons v. State

479 So. 2d 284, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2711, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 17216

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 6, 1985 | Docket: 64615899

Published

required before imposing restitution because section 775.089, Florida Statutes (Supp.1984), provides that

Dolan v. State

468 So. 2d 442, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1113, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 13807

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 3, 1985 | Docket: 64611771

Published

appellant to pay $1,500 in restitution pursuant to section 775.089(1), Florida Statutes (1981), is stricken since

G. H. v. State

414 So. 2d 1135, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 20236

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 8, 1982 | Docket: 64590421

Published

similarly worded counterpart for adult offenders, Section 775.089(1), Florida Statutes (1981), which allows a