Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Habeb

Court of Appeals of Idaho

August 30, 2019

STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
MOHAMAD BAKIR ALI HABEB, Defendant-Appellant.

          Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada County. Hon. Richard D. Greenwood, District Judge.

         Judgment of restitution, affirmed.

          Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Brian R. Dickson, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

          Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

          LORELLO, JUDGE

         Mohamad Bakir Ali Habeb appeals from the district court's judgment ordering him to pay $5, 860.45 in restitution following a jury verdict finding him guilty of felony malicious injury to property. Habeb argues that there was insufficient evidence to support the restitution order and that the district court improperly shifted the burden to him to disprove the evidence the State presented in support of its restitution request. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm.

         I.

         FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

         A jury found Habeb guilty of felony malicious injury to property. The State alleged that Habeb committed the charged offense when he hit the victim's vehicle, a 2011 Hyundai Elantra, with a baseball bat. Following Habeb's conviction, the State sought restitution in the amount of $6, 060.45. Following an evidentiary hearing, the district court ordered restitution in the amount of $5, 860.45. Habeb appeals.[1]

         II.

         STANDARD OF REVIEW

         We will not overturn an order of restitution unless an abuse of discretion is shown. State v. Richmond, 137 Idaho 35, 37, 43 P.3d 794, 796 (Ct. App. 2002). When a trial court's discretionary decision is reviewed on appeal, the appellate court conducts a multi-tiered inquiry to determine whether the lower court: (1) correctly perceived the issue as one of discretion, (2) acted within the boundaries of such discretion, (3) acted consistently with any legal standards applicable to the specific choices before it, and (4) reached its decision by an exercise of reason. Lunneborg v. My Fun Life, 163 Idaho 856, 863, 421 P.3d 187, 194 (2018).

         The determination of the amount of restitution, which includes the issue of causation, is a question of fact for the trial court. State v. Corbus, 150 Idaho 599, 602, 249 P.3d 398, 401 (2011); State v. Hamilton, 129 Idaho 938, 943, 935 P.2d 201, 206 (Ct. App. 1997). The district court's factual findings with regard to restitution will not be disturbed on appeal if supported by substantial evidence. Cor ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.