Commonwealth v. Ortiz, 854 A.2d 1280 (Pa. Super Ct. 2004)

Cases | Commonwealth v. Ortiz, 854 A.2d 1280 (Pa. Super Ct. 2004) | 2018

The defendant entered a negotiated guilty plea to car theft in exchange for a sentence that included $159 in restitution. Seven-and-a-half months later, the Commonwealth filed a motion to increase restitution by $1,188.21, the amount contained on a repair estimate for damage done to the victim’s car after it was stolen. The victim was aware of the estimate prior to sentencing, and the Commonwealth knew of the amount within 30 days of sentencing, while the trial court still had jurisdiction. Nevertheless, the trial judge granted the motion and added $1,188.21 to the restitution amount. The defendant appealed. The Superior Court of Pennsylvania reversed, noting that the restitution order was part of the negotiated sentence. Absent changed circumstances, the Commonwealth could not later seek to increase the amount of restitution, especially since the additional amount sought by the Commonwealth could have been ascertained prior to sentencing. Furthermore, since there was no change in circumstances, it was improper for the trial court to modify the terms of the order of restitution.