Commonwealth v. Walton, 397 A.2d 1179 (Pa. 1977)

Cases | Commonwealth v. Walton, 397 A.2d 1179 (Pa. 1977) | 2018

The defendant was convicted by a judge sitting without a jury of aggravated assault, recklessly endangering another person, and two weapons offenses. At the sentencing hearing, the judge ascertained the defendant’s earning potential, and then sentenced him to probation for 19 years on the condition that he pay the victim, whom the defendant blinded in both eyes with a shotgun blast to the face. The restitution would amount to $25 per week paid over the entire probationary period. The defendant appealed, challenging the authority of the trial court to order restitution. The Superior Court remanded for re-sentencing. The Supreme Court granted the Commonwealth’s petition for allowance of appeal to determine whether or not the courts had the authority to order restitution as a condition of probation. The Supreme Court reversed the Superior Court’s order and reinstated the trial court’s order, finding that there is a significant distinction between restitution required in addition to a statutory punishment, such as imprisonment, and restitution required in lieu of such punishment. Courts have broad discretion to fashion appropriate conditions of probation, including the practice of ordering restitution or reparation. The trial court had the legal authority to enter the order of restitution.