Ontiveros ex rel. Malheur County Juvenile Department v. Ontiveros

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Ontiveros ex rel. Malheur County Juvenile Department v. Ontiveros

93 P.3d 98, 194 Or. App. 184, 2004 Ore. App. LEXIS 803

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedJuly 8, 2004

Docket7329J-02; A120803

StatusPublished

This text of 93 P.3d 98 (Ontiveros ex rel. Malheur County Juvenile Department v. Ontiveros) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ontiveros ex rel. Malheur County Juvenile Department v. Ontiveros, 93 P.3d 98, 194 Or. App. 184, 2004 Ore. App. LEXIS 803 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Youth appeals a judgment finding that he is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court because he committed acts that, if he were an adult, would constitute first-degree criminal mischief. He challenges the legal sufficiency of the state’s proof. We reject that challenge without farther discussion. He also challenges the trial court’s imposition of an award of restitution in the amount of $1,379.70. He contends that the estimate of damages on which the award was based was inaccurate and included costs for items that were not causally related to the damage that he inflicted. The state concedes that the restitution order may not be supported by the record and asks that the case be remanded for a recalculation of restitution. We accept the state’s concession.

Award of restitution vacated and remanded for recalculation; otherwise affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM

Youth appeals a judgment finding that he is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court because he committed acts that, if he were an adult, would constitute first-degree criminal mischief. He challenges the legal sufficiency of the state’s proof. We reject that challenge without farther discussion. He also challenges the trial court’s imposition of an award of restitution in the amount of $1,379.70. He contends that the estimate of damages on which the award was based was inaccurate and included costs for items that were not causally related to the damage that he inflicted. The state concedes that the restitution order may not be supported by the record and asks that the case be remanded for a recalculation of restitution. We accept the state’s concession.

Award of restitution vacated and remanded for recalculation; otherwise affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

93 P.3d 98, 194 Or. App. 184, 2004 Ore. App. LEXIS 803, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ontiveros-ex-rel-malheur-county-juvenile-department-v-ontiveros-orctapp-2004.