Criminal Trespass Juvenile Restitution In Arizona

In In re Alton D., 196 Ariz. 195, 994 P.2d 402 (2000), a juvenile admitted to criminal trespass and agreed to pay restitution in an amount not to exceed $ 3000. Id. at 196, P 2, 994 P.2d at 403. At the disposition hearing on May 8, the juvenile court placed the juvenile on probation, ordered that restitution would remain open until June 10, and stated that if a restitution request was not submitted by June 10, "the restitution order would be deemed closed." Id. The State appealed the juvenile court's order and argued that requiring a victim to file a restitution claim within a reasonable deadline conflicted with a victim's right to receive restitution. Id. at P 3. In Alton D., the Arizona Supreme Court made clear that the interests of the juvenile's right to a speedy disposition and a victim's right to restitution must be balanced. Id. at 199-200, P 19, 994 P.2d at 406-07. In balancing such rights, the court held "that when, in light of the circumstances of a particular case, the court sets a reasonable deadline by which victims must present their restitution claims and supporting evidence, any victim who fails to comply is barred from recovery." Id. The court noted that until a final order is entered, a juvenile lacks a remedy to appeal. Id. at 197, P 8, 994 P.2d at 404. It further stated that "in cases involving restitution, the restitution order constitutes the final order for appeal purposes" and a victim is required to present evidence that his or her loss is not speculative and relates to the juvenile's offense. Id. at P 9. The court reasoned that until a court can determine the restitution amount no final order exists - preventing a juvenile from a speedy appeal. Id. at PP 9-10. Therefore, the court found that allowing the juvenile court to set a reasonable deadline for a victim to request restitution properly balances the rights of juveniles and victims.