In re A.B.

1

2021-Ohio-4273

IN RE: A.B.

No. C-210010

Court of Appeals of Ohio, First District, Hamilton

December 8, 2021

Appeal From: Hamilton County Juvenile Court Trial No. 20-1668Z

Joseph T. Deters, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, and Keith Sauter, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Plaintiff-Appellee,

Raymond T. Faller, Hamilton County Public Defender, Andrew Hakala-Finch, Assistant Public Defender, and Jessica Moss Assistant Public Defender, for Defendant-Appellant.

OPINION

Zayas Presiding Judge

{¶1} A.B. appeals the juvenile court's order of restitution arguing that the juvenile court abused its discretion in ordering A.B. to pay restitution because the amount of restitution ordered does not bear a reasonable relationship to the actual loss suffered. For the following reasons, we affirm the judgment of the juvenile court.

Procedural History

{¶2} On April 10, 2020, a complaint was filed alleging that A.B. was delinquent for committing felonious assault on or about April 8, 2020, in violation of R.C. 2903.11(A), a felony of the second degree if committed by an adult. A.B. subsequently entered a plea of admit as charged in exchange for the state not seeking a serious-youthful-offender indictment and was adjudicated delinquent on September 9, 2020. The juvenile court committed A.B. to the legal custody of the Department of Youth Services for an indefinite term, consisting of a minimum of one year and a maximum period not to exceed A.B.'s twenty-first birthday. A separate hearing was held on November 30, 2020, to determine restitution and the juvenile court ordered that A.B. pay $19, 485.45 in restitution.

Factual Background

{¶3} The victim of the underlying assault was Jerry Bryant. At the restitution hearing, the state called Karen Bryant, the mother of Jerry Bryant ("mother"), to testify.

Testimony of Karen Bryant

{¶4} Mother testified that Jerry was transported by ambulance to Mercy Hospital as a result of the events that took place on April 8, 2020. She stated:

At Mercy Hospital they put the tube in his chest. They did a bunch of x-rays, MRI, blood work, and different other things. He sat there for about five hours.

I would say around 8:30 that night is when they transported him to UC, and at UC, from where his nose got [sic] broke and got busted open right here, they had to go up in there and refix his nose and put seven stitches across the bridge of his nose.

He was -- I could not see him because of the COVID virus. They had [sic] called me later on that night, and they had told me that he was -- they had to do another procedure because he was choking on his own blood.

He was there from April 8th until April 12th, or it might have been April 13th. I would call every hour on the hour -- I know they were getting aggravated with me and everything -- just to find out how my son was because they told me he was in critical condition. That's the only son I have, and I didn't know whether he was going to live or die that day.

{¶5} Jerry did not have medical insurance. Jerry came to stay with mother when he was released. Since then, they received medical bills in the mail in Jerry's name. When asked if the medical bills had been paid, mother responded, "No, I can't pay these bills." Seven medical bills were admitted into evidence. Mother testified that all the bills were incurred because of the incident on April 8, 2020. She was not aware of any further discounts or reductions in the medical bills she received. To her knowledge, none of the bills had changed and no further negotiations had taken place with any of the medical providers. Jerry applied to the Victims of Crime Relief Fund but was told that nothing would be paid.

Medical Bills

{¶6} State's exhibit 1 is a medical bill, dated April 13, 2020, from Mercy Health, which reflects an amount due of $13, 127.88. The amount reflected includes a "self-pay discount (uninsured)" in the amount of $8, 751.92. State's exhibit 2 is a medical bill, dated April 13, 2020, from Mercy Health Physicians reflecting an amount due of $10.80. The amount reflected includes an "adjustment" of $7.20. State's exhibit 3 is a medical bill, dated April 22, 2020, from U.S. Acute Care Solutions, which reflects an amount due of $3.353.52. State's exhibit 4 is a medical bill, dated May 15, 2020, from Columbus Radiology, which reflects an amount due of $1, 950. The amount reflected includes an adjustment of $1, 478. State's exhibit 5 is a medical bill, dated April 16, 2020, from Southern Ohio Pathology Consultants, which reflects an amount due of $24. The reflected amount includes a "self-pay discount writeoff [sic]-credit" of $56. State's exhibit 6 is a medical bill, dated April 17, 2020, from First Care reflecting an amount due of $359.25. This reflected amount includes two "negotiated discounts" in the amounts of $782.95 and $77.20. State's exhibit 7 is a medical bill, dated April 14, 2020, from "City of Springfield FD," which reflects an amount due of $660.

Decision of the Juvenile Court

{¶7} The state requested $19, 485.45 in restitution, the total amount of all seven medical bills. The trial court found that each bill was a medical treatment or service provided as a result of the criminal act for which A.B. and his brother had been adjudicated delinquent, the bills supported Jerry's economic losses, and the amount requested was supported by the documents and evidence accepted as exhibits for the purposes of the restitution hearing. Accordingly, the juvenile court found that the amount of restitution requested was supported by competent, credible evidence. The court then stated:

Now, the problem that we have is if there is [sic] further discounts being provided through an uninsured discount. We see on state's exhibit #1 that there's a substantial discount provided. So in the event there is discounts provided for the medical services, then the restitution amount would be reduced, okay? But as of now, I'll do an exact total, but it's roughly $19, 485.45, okay, until we get a calculator to total them up. All right. That will be on the record. Anything else from anyone? That will be jointly and severally, which means you're both responsible for the total amount individually. But if one or the other is making payments and it's split equally between you and your brother, then that can be done that way, too, okay? Or a third or two-thirds, however it may be paid off, all right? All right. So that concludes the restitution hearing.

* * *

Well, I'm going to leave that to the responsibility of the Bryants to bring forward information to the prosecutor's office if you're receiving a discount. They can provide that information so that we can put it in by an Entry to make the reduction. But, as of this point, this is what we have to go by, and it appears from her testimony that this is what they're responsible for or her son's responsible for. Okay? All right. Thank you.

Law and Analysis

{¶8} In his sole assignment of error, A.B. argues that the juvenile court abused its discretion in ordering A.B. to pay restitution because the amount of restitution ordered does not bear a reasonable relationship to the actual loss suffered. "A decision to award restitution lies within the sound discretion of a juvenile court and will not be reversed on appeal absent an abuse of discretion." In re M.N., 2017-Ohio-7302, 96 N.E.3d 980, ¶ 8 (1st Dist.), citing In re MA., 2016-Ohio-1161, 61 N.E.3d 630, ¶ 12 (11th Dist.). "There must be competent and credible evidence in the record from which the court may ascertain the amount of restitution to a reasonable degree of certainty." Id., citing State v Seele, 6th Dist. Sandusky No. S-13-025, 2014-Ohio-1455, ¶ 9. "A trial court abuses its discretion by ordering restitution in an amount that does not bear a reasonable relationship to the actual loss suffered." (Citations omitted.) Id.

{¶9} If a child is adjudicated a delinquent child, for an act that would not be a minor misdemeanor if committed by an adult, the juvenile court may require the child to make restitution to the victim of the child's delinquent act in an amount based upon the victim's economic loss caused by or related to the delinquent act. R.C. 2152.20(A)(3). "If the court requires restitution under this division, the restitution shall be made directly to the victim in open court or to the probation department that serves the jurisdiction or the clerk of courts on behalf of the victim." Id.

If the court requires restitution under this division, the court may base the restitution order on an amount recommended by the victim or survivor of the victim, the delinquent child, the juvenile traffic offender, a presentence investigation report, estimates or receipts indicating the cost of repairing or replacing property, and any other information, provided that the amount the court orders as restitution shall not exceed the amount of the economic loss suffered by the victim as a direct and proximate result of the delinquent act or juvenile traffic offense. If the court decides to order restitution under this division and the amount of the restitution is disputed by the victim or survivor or by the delinquent child or juvenile traffic offender, the court shall hold a hearing on the restitution. If the court requires restitution under this division, the court shall determine, or order the determination of, the amount of restitution to be paid by the delinquent child or juvenile traffic offender.

Id. "The court may hold a hearing if necessary to determine whether a child is able to pay a sanction under this section." R.C. 2152.20(C).

'Economic loss' means any economic detriment suffered by a victim of a delinquent act or juvenile traffic offense as a direct and proximate result of the delinquent act

...