 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Blanchard11/12/2003
t wages was $6,335.28. Ms. Poussard testified that she was forced to rely upon her mother, Carmen Trahan Poussard, to take care of her "24/7" for at least two weeks, because she had just had a baby and because of the injuries she sustained in the accident.
She further testified that her mother missed 104 hours of work in order to care for her, and that her mother's lost wages was $1,290.64.
Ms. Poussard also incurred expenses of $58.02 for a wheelchair, $60.00 for a nurse for one month, and $211.14 for foot inserts.
Ms. Poussard testified that she got a bill for $25,763.50 for her hospital care; her insurance paid these expenses except for $450.00 which was her out-of-pocket expense. For the baby, the total charges were $5,855.70 which the insurance paid except for $430.00 which was her co-payment. Co-payments for follow-up visits were $165.00, and co-payments for physical therapy were $135.00.
Ms. Poussard explained that she was currently working, and lost wages for her court appearances totaled $116.00. Further she incurred expenses for approximately $6.00 in gas for the court appearances.
She further testified that her only out-of-pocket expenses as of the hearing date were $211.14 for the inserts and $60.00 for the wheelchair, but that she was being billed for the remainder of the expenses.
At the hearing, defense counsel argued that La. C.Cr.P. art. 895 only compensates a victim for direct loss of actual cash, and that the victim testified that her out-of-pocket expenses were approximately $60.00 for the wheelchair and $211.14 for the inserts. Defense counsel admitted that Article 895 only dealt with probation, and that defendant was not placed on probation.
At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial judge explained that all the expenses resulted from the conduct of defendant in operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated and in causing injuries to the victim which rendered her permanently disabled. The trial judge said that he could not award restitution to her mother because the statute did not allow the victim of the crime to make a claim on behalf of other parties who were not victims themselves. The trial judge stated that the total restitution was $8,192.44.
The trial judge imposed restitution in accordance with La. R.S. 46:1844 which provides in pertinent part:
(1) If the defendant is found guilty, the court or parole board shall require the defendant to pay restitution to the appropriate party in an amount and manner determined by the court. In addition, the court or parole board may require the defendant to perform community service work in an amount and according to a schedule determined by the court.
(2) One of the conditions of work release shall be a requirement that an inmate pay from his earnings all restitution ordered by the court or the parole board. Even if no restitution has been ordered, the sheriff or director of the program shall have the right to require payment of restitution as a condition of work release.
In State v. Lam, 36,862 (La. App. 2 Cir. 2/11/03), 837 So.2d 749, 758, the court stated:
Before August 15, 1999, the collection of restitution from a defendant had to be accomplished in the criminal courts as a condition of probation pursuant to either La.C.Cr.P. art. 895.A(7) or La.C.Cr.P. art. 895.1.A, which meant that at least some portion of the sentence itself was suspended. Effective August 15, 1999, La.C.Cr.P. art. 883.2 now allows restitution to be implemented as a part of the sentence itself, without need of probationary conditions.
La. C.Cr.P. art. 883.2 provides as follows:
In all
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Louisiana DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|