State v. Metlin
| Decision Date | 10 April 1985 |
| Docket Number | No. CR,CR |
| Citation | 467 So.2d 876 |
| Parties | STATE of Louisiana, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William W. METLIN, Defendant-Appellant. 84-603. 467 So.2d 876 |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US |
F. Clay Tillman, Jr., Tillman & Fontenot, Leesville, for defendant-appellant.
Edwin L. Cabra, Asst. Dist. Atty., Leesville, for plaintiff-appellee.
Before DOMENGEAUX, DOUCET and KING, JJ.
The sole issue presented by this appeal is whether the trial court erred in ordering restitution, as a condition of defendant's probation, to victims of burglary and theft when the defendant only pled guilty to illegal possession of stolen things.
Defendant, William W. Metlin, (hereinafter Metlin) was originally charged in a seven count bill of information with four counts of illegal possession of stolen things valued at more than one hundred ($100.00) dollars (La.R.S. 14:69), one count of being an accessory after the fact to a felony (La.R.S. 14:25), one count of simple criminal damage to property (La.R.S. 14:56) and one count of simple battery (La.R.S. 14:35). Pursuant to a plea bargain, Metlin entered pleas of guilty to the first three counts of the bill of information, after the State amended each of the counts to three counts of illegal possession of stolen things valued at less than one hundred ($100.00) dollars. The court then ordered the other four counts of the information dismissed on motion of the State as part of its plea bargain with Metlin.
The trial court sentenced Metlin on each count to pay a fine of five hundred ($500.00) dollars plus court costs and to serve six months in the Vernon Parish jail with each jail sentence to run consecutively. The court then suspended the execution of the jail sentences on each count and placed Metlin on supervised probation for a period of two years subject to the general and mandatory conditions of probation set forth in Art. 895 of the La.C.Cr.P., except for the condition of La.C.Cr.P. Art. 895(A)(6), and with the following special conditions of probation, to-wit:
(1) Immediate payment of the fine and court cost;
(2) Payment of restitution within a period of one year as follows:
(a) To Pat Plush in the sum of $4,133.50;
(b) To Ingrid Sanut in the sum of $3,374.00;
(c) To Durhl Davis in the sum of $530.00.
The parties to whom the restitution was to be made were victims of crimes in which the property stolen from them was illegally possessed by Metlin and the dollar amounts of restitution represented the monetary value of their property stolen from them.
Asserting one assignment of error, urging the illegality of the sentence ordering restitution as a special condition of probation, Metlin appeals his sentence. We affirm.
The charges against Metlin arose from his involvement with Alan J. Silvers who confessed to twenty-two distinct burglaries and thefts and who claimed that Metlin, as operator of a pawn shop, had provided the market for all the jewelry he had stolen. The trial court noted at sentencing "that there was a suggestion that many of the items of jewelry were cut up and sold for the scrap precious metal" and that Metlin, by providing a market for the stolen items, was encouraging the burglaries. Victims of the various burglaries and thefts of jewelry committed by Alan J. Silvers included Pat Plush, Ingrid Sanut and Durhl Davis.
Metlin contends that the trial court erred in ordering him to pay restitution, in the amount of $8,037.50, to those victims of burglaries committed by Alan J. Silvers when Metlin did not plead guilty to the burglaries and thefts from the parties to whom he was ordered to make restitution, citing State v. Alleman, 439 So.2d 418 (La.1983); State v. Labure, 427 So.2d 855 (La.1983).
The applicable statute, La.C.Cr.P. Art. 895(A)(7), which permits the court to order restitution as a condition of probation states:
A. When the court suspends the imposition or execution of sentence and places a defendant on probation, it shall require the defendant to refrain from criminal conduct and it may impose any specific conditions reasonably related to his rehabilitation, including any of the following:
That the defendant shall:
* * *
(7) Make reasonable reparation or restitution to the aggrieved party for damage or loss caused by his offense in an amount to be determined by...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Thomas
...stated: "The trial court's decision in ordering restitution should not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion. State v. Metlin, 467 So.2d 876 (La.App. 3 Cir.1985)." Further, La.Code Crim.P. art. 881.2(A)(2) provides that a defendant may not appeal a sentence imposed in conformity with a......
-
State v. Meredith
...3 Cir. 3/2/05), 896 So.2d 302, 307 ); see also State v. Peters, 611 So.2d 191, 192 (La.App. 5th Cir.1992) (citing State v. Metlin, 467 So.2d 876 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1985) ).155 So.3d 558Mr. Meredith acknowledges the principle that a district court has discretion in setting the amount of restit......
-
State v. Meredith
...(La.App. 3 Cir. 3/2/05), 896 So.2d 302, 307); see also State v. Peters, 611 So.2d 191, 192 (La.App. 5th Cir.1992)(citing State v. Metlin, 467 So.2d 876 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1985)). [155 So.3d 558] Mr. Meredith acknowledges the principle that a district court has discretion in setting the amount......
-
In re State D.B., 13–1364.
...by Defendant. Thus, the trial court was correct in ordering restitution in the amount of $33,496.90.Id. at 862. In State v. Metlin, 467 So.2d 876 (La.App. 3 Cir.1985), the defendant pled guilty to three counts of illegal possession of stolen things valued under $100.00 and was ordered to ma......