Cases | 2004-Ohio-2236(Ohio Ct. App. 2004) | 2018
The defendant pled guilty to aggravated robbery with a firearm and theft following three bank robberies. The defendant was ordered to pay $23,329 in restitution to one bank, $2,000 to the second, and $5,305 to the third, though there was testimony at the sentencing hearing that $305 had been reimbursed to the third bank by their insurance company. The defendant appealed, arguing the order of restitution was improper because the amounts to the various banks were not supported by evidence. The appellate court found the losses to the banks were determined based on testimony at the sentencing hearing and the pre-sentence investigation report and that such evidence supported the amounts ordered for the first two banks but not the portion already paid to the third bank. Because the $305 was not an economic loss to the bank, it was improperly ordered as restitution, though, on remand, the trial court could properly order the defendant to reimburse the insurance company, as authorized by the statute. The order of restitution for the third bank was remanded for redetermination and the orders for the two other banks were affirmed.