Smiley v. State

417 P.3d 174
CourtWyoming Supreme Court
DecidedMay 15, 2018
DocketS-17-0181
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 417 P.3d 174 (Smiley v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wyoming Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Smiley v. State, 417 P.3d 174 (Wyo. 2018).

Opinion

DAVIS, Justice.

[¶1] Sonya Smiley appeals from the judgment and sentence entered after her guilty plea to one count of being an accessory to the second-degree sexual abuse of a minor and one count of third-degree sexual abuse of a second minor. She contests only a restitution award of $17,515.20 to Wyoming Medicaid for its expenditures on behalf of the second victim. We affirm.

ISSUES

[¶2] Smiley challenges the restitution on two bases:1

1. The amount awarded was not supported by sufficient evidence.
2. The district court otherwise abused its discretion in making that award because Smiley lacked the financial resources to pay it.

FACTS

[¶3] Between January 1, 2015 and May 8, 2016, two teen girls fell under the sway of Smiley and her husband. The couple offered to take care of fifteen-year-old AM after school and on weekends, purportedly to assist her busy single mother. They initially treated her well, buying her gifts and taking her to social events, and they eventually had her stay at their home for extended periods of time. Sometimes AM was accompanied by her fourteen-year-old friend AH, and the two teens would spend the night at the Smiley home.

[¶4] After several months, Smiley and her husband began to suggest to AM that, because they had done so many nice things for *176her, she should return the favor. Thus began a series of overtly sexual activities with the child, which need not be described in detail here. The Smileys also involved AH in some of these activities and frequently photographed the girls while they modeled lingerie and bathing suits for them. Ultimately, they induced AM to perform oral sex on Smiley's husband.

[¶5] In late December of 2016, the Natrona County District Attorney charged Smiley with six felonies, four related to the sexual abuse of AM and two related to the sexual abuse of AH. She waived a preliminary hearing in the circuit court and was arraigned in district court on February 9, 2017. Smiley sought to change her previously entered not guilty pleas on March 29, with an April 10, 2017 trial pending. Two days later, the district court continued the trial and scheduled a hearing on April 27 for that purpose.2

[¶6] The prosecutor advised the court at the change of plea hearing that Smiley had agreed to plead guilty to Counts One and Six of the Second Amended Information in exchange for the dismissal of the remaining charges. There was no agreement with respect to sentencing, other than that the two sentences would run concurrently.

[¶7] With respect to Count One, being an accessory to the second-degree sexual abuse of a minor by sexual intrusion, Smiley admitted coaching AM in the proper way to perform fellatio on her husband. With respect to Count Six, committing third-degree sexual abuse by taking indecent liberties with a minor, she admitted encouraging AH to wear a "submissive sex-slave collar" in front of her and her husband.

[¶8] After accepting her pleas, the court ordered probation and parole authorities to prepare a presentence investigation report. Sentencing was set for June 8, 2017.

[¶9] The presentence investigation report indicated that the Wyoming Division of Victims Services had requested $495.24 and Wyoming Medicaid had requested $17,515.20, and that both requests had been "verified." It further noted that Victims Services paid out $350.00 on behalf of AH and $145.24 on behalf of AM. It also said that Wyoming Medicaid paid the full $17,515.20 on behalf of AH "for bills incurred as a result of these offenses."

[¶10] AH's mother offered additional information about the proposed restitution award in her victim impact statement. She recounted that her daughter suffered from anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder because of the Smileys' actions, and that as a result, she repeatedly hurt herself and attempted suicide. Her mother obtained various forms of counseling for her, but the grave nature of her psychological condition necessitated two "stays" with the Wyoming Behavioral Institute in the year between March of 2016 and the date of sentencing.3

[¶11] Toward the end of the hearing, Smiley's attorney briefly addressed the issue of restitution:

The only issue I have is the amount of restitution for specifically Wyoming Medicaid is $17,515.20. I'm not saying that it's not legitimate, but I was never provided any documentation. There's simply checked, verified, yes. I don't even know what it was for. If I can just be provided documentation-I'm assuming it was for counseling, but I don't know. But if I could be provided that, I would not have an objection.[4 ] But, nonetheless, I don't think that Ms. Smiley should be ordered to pay restitution. She has absolutely no dis-no ability to pay. She's on disability. You would be essentially robbing Peter to pay Paul, so to speak, taking from one government agency to pay another. And I don't *177think that restitution in this case is warranted.

[¶12] The district court ordered that Smiley and her husband were jointly and severally liable for the requested amount of restitution, and sentenced her to concurrent terms of eighteen to twenty years on Count One and ten to fifteen years on Count Six. She timely perfected this appeal.

DISCUSSION

The Amount of Restitution

[¶13] This Court evaluates Smiley's factual challenge to the amount of restitution ordered for a clear abuse of discretion. Consistent with that standard, we view the evidence as sufficient to support the sentencing court's decision if it affords a reasonable basis for estimating a victim's loss. Guinard v. State , 2014 WY 140, ¶ 6, 337 P.3d 426, 428 (Wyo. 2014) ; Frederick v. State , 2007 WY 27, ¶¶ 14-15, 151 P.3d 1136, 1141 (Wyo. 2007). A court may reasonably rely on the contents of a victim impact statement or a presentence investigation report as sufficient in that regard. Frederick , ¶ 14, 151 P.3d at 1141 ; Penner v. State , 2003 WY 143, ¶ 7, 78 P.3d 1045, 1047 (Wyo. 2003) ; Brock v. State , 967 P.2d 26, 27-28 (Wyo. 1998) (victim's mother simply asked for $500 to cover deductible in insurance policy that would be used to pay for child's counseling).

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

Related

Kylea Rae Baier v. The State of Wyoming
2026 WY 27 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 2026)
Timothy B. Duke v. The State of Wyoming
2025 WY 72 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 2025)
William Corey Holliday v. The State of Wyoming
2024 WY 139 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 2024)
Michael John Corr v. The State of Wyoming
2022 WY 113 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 2022)
Alexander Vincent Ray Cave v. The State of Wyoming
2022 WY 30 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 2022)
Voelker v. State
420 P.3d 1098 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 2018)
McEwan v. State
419 P.3d 881 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
417 P.3d 174, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smiley-v-state-wyo-2018.