from the District Court of Burleigh County, South Central
Judicial District, the Honorable Bruce A. Romanick, Judge.
J. Schwarz, Assistant State's Attorney, Bismarck, ND, for
plaintiff and appellee.
Matthew J. Arthurs, Bismarck, ND, for defendant and
Chad Demonn Walker appeals from an amended judgment that
included an order to pay restitution. We affirm.
On July 10, 2018, Bismarck Police Officer Marquis observed
Chad Demonn Walker riding a 2013 red Honda motorcycle. The
motorcycle did not have a license plate and matched the
description of a motorcycle stolen in Minot. Officer Marquis
conducted a traffic stop and confirmed the motorcycle was
stolen by checking the vehicle identification number. Officer
Marquis arrested Walker.
Walker pled guilty to theft for possession of a stolen
motorcycle. The motorcycle owner filed a victim impact
statement requesting restitution for the cost of repairing
the motorcycle. A restitution hearing was held and an amended
criminal judgment was entered, ordering Walker pay $2, 410.69
in repairs for damage to the motorcycle.
Walker argues he pled guilty to possession of stolen property
and was not accused of stealing or damaging the motorcycle.
He further argues the damages are not related to his criminal
offense and were not a direct result of his criminal action.
The standard of review for restitution is well established.
"When reviewing a restitution order, we look to whether
the district court acted within the limits set by statute,
which is a standard similar to our abuse of discretion
standard. A district court abuses its discretion if it acts
in an arbitrary, unreasonable, or unconscionable manner, if
its decision is not the product of a rational mental process
leading to a reasoned determination, or if it misinterprets
or misapplies the law."
State v. Rogers, 2018 ND 244, ¶ 23, 919 N.W.2d
193 (citing State v. Bruce, 2018 ND 45, ¶ 4,
907 N.W.2d 773 (internal citations and quotation marks
omitted)). "The district courts possess a 'wide
degree of discretion when determining restitution
awards.'" Rogers, at ¶ 23 (citing
State v. Putney, 2016 ND 135, ¶ 6, 881 N.W.2d
663). "But, 'in determining whether or not the
district court abused its discretion through misapplication
or misinterpretation of the law,' we apply a de novo
standard of review." Rogers, at ¶ 23
(citing State v. Kostelecky, 2018 ND 12, ¶ 6,
906 N.W.2d 77). "A district court's award of
restitution to a crime victim is made under N.D. Const. art.
I, § 25(1)(n) and N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-08."
Rogers, at ¶ 23. "The 'State has the
burden of proving the amount of restitution by a
preponderance of the evidence.'" Rogers, at
¶ 23 (quoting State v. Kleppe, 2011 ND 141,
¶ 28, 800 ...