State v. Casto, 912 P.2d 772 (Kan. Ct. App. 1996)

Cases | State v. Casto, 912 P.2d 772 (Kan. Ct. App. 1996) | 2018

The defendant took a tractor from the victim’s farm. The tractor was later recovered from a local creek and the defendant pled guilty to misdemeanor theft, misdemeanor criminal damage to property, and criminal trespass. The victim originally purchased the tractor for $9750. He received $9900 from his insurance company, repurchased the tractor from the insurance company for $3000, and repaired it for $1202.52. The trial court ordered restitution for the insurance payment and repair costs. On appeal, the defendant claimed that the trial court failed to establish a reasonable present value for the tractor. The appellate court held that the restitution amount was not defensible because it failed to consider the tractor’s value after repairs were made. Restitution should not have exceeded the reasonable market value of the tractor immediately before the damage.