State v. Brady, 819 P.2d 1033 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1991). · Go Syfert
Search
State v. Brady, 819 P.2d 1033 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1991). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
20 citation events (6 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Treatment trajectory · 1991 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1991 2008 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In Re Brigham H.
Ariz. Ct. App. · 2021 · confidence medium
State v. Wilkinson, 202 Ariz. 27, 29, ¶ 7 (2002). ¶18 The cost of installing new home security cameras is directly attributable to criminal conduct if it was “incurred ‘in an effort to restore the victim’s equanimity’ following the criminal offense.” State v. Quijada, 246 Ariz. 356 , 369 ¶ 44 (App. 2019) (quoting State v. Brady, 169 Ariz. 447, 448 (App. 1991)). ¶19 Brigham argues the security camera expenses were not directly caused by the criminal conduct and cannot be part of the restitution 5 IN RE BRIGHAM H.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In Re Colson D.
Ariz. Ct. App. · 2021 · confidence medium
A court may award restitution for expenses that are "incurred 'in an effort to restore the victim's equanimity' following the criminal offense." Quijada, 246 Ariz. at 369 , ¶ 44 (quoting State v. Brady, 169 Ariz. 447, 448 (App. 1991)). ¶16 D.Q. testified that he "couldn't just paint the garage door and . . . the front of the house, so the whole house was painted." Colson fails to argue that painting the entire house was not part of an effort to restore D.Q.'s equanimity.
cited Cited as authority (rule) In Re Tommy G.
Ariz. Ct. App. · 2021 · confidence medium
State v. Brady, 169 Ariz. 447, 448 (App. 1991).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Quijada
Ariz. Ct. App. · 2019 · confidence medium
And in State v. Brady, where a victim was sexually assaulted in her apartment, the court held that “moving expenses incurred in an effort to restore the victim’s equanimity” were directly attributable to the defendant’s criminal conduct. 169 Ariz. 447, 448 (App. 1991). ¶44 With this framework in mind, we conclude the expenses associated with installing a home security system may be recoverable as restitution if they were incurred “in an effort to restore the victim’s equanimity” following the criminal offense.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Wilkinson (2×)
Ariz. Ct. App. · 2000 · confidence medium
See, e.g., Lindsley, 191 Ariz. at 199 , 953 P.2d at 1252 (upholding a restitution award for a victim's wages lost by voluntary attendance at court proceedings); State v. Blanton, 173 Ariz. 517, 520 , 844 P.2d 1167, 1170 (App.1992) (finding no abuse of discretion in awarding restitution to a homicide victim's parents for the headstone, flowers, chapel music, minister's honorarium, and chapel fee); State v. Brady, 169 Ariz. 447, 448 , 819 P.2d 1033, 1034 (App.1991)(holding that the court may award moving costs as restitution to the victim of a sexual assault); see also Morris, 173 Ariz. at 18-19…
discussed Cited "see" State v. Prieto (2×)
Ariz. Ct. App. · 1992 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Brady, 169 Ariz. 447 , 819 P.2d 1033 (App.1991) (victim of sexual assault may recover moving expense necessary to restore peace of mind); and State v. Wideman, 165 Ariz. 364 , 798 P.2d 1373 (App.1990) (allowing recovery for mental health counseling).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Reece v. State (2×)
Alaska Ct. App. · 1994 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., State v. Brady, 169 Ariz. 447 , 819 P.2d 1033 , 1034 (App.1991); Strough v. State, 501 So.2d 488, 490-91 (Ala.Crim.App. 1986).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
STATE of Arizona, Appellee,
v.
Roger Alan BRADY, Appellant.
1 CA-CR 90-1409, 1 CA-CR 90-1410.
Court of Appeals of Arizona.
Oct 15, 1991.
819 P.2d 1033
Kleinschmidt.
Cited by 11 opinions  |  Published

[*448] Grant Woods, Atty. Gen. by Paul J. McMurdie, Chief Counsel, Crim. Div., and Diane M. Ramsey, Asst. Atty. Gen., Phoenix, for appellee.

Dean W. Trebesch, Maricopa County Public Defender by James L. Edgar, Deputy Public Defender, Phoenix, for appellant.

OPINION

KLEINSCHMIDT, Judge.

The defendant, Roger Brady, pled guilty to two counts of sexual assault. He appeals an order requiring him to pay restitution for his victim's moving expenses, arguing that these are consequential damages not recoverable as restitution. We disagree.

At the time of the assault, the defendant threatened that if the victim called the police he would come back and harm her. After the assault, the victim received some unusual telephone calls. Thereafter, she moved out of the apartment where the assault had taken place because she feared that her assailant might return and do her further harm, and because the memory of the incident made remaining in the apartment stressful.

Arizona Revised Statutes § 13-105(11), which defines the economic loss that can be the subject of a restitution order, provides:

Economic loss means any loss incurred as a result of the commission of an offense. Economic loss includes lost interest, lost earnings and other losses which would not have been incurred but for the offense. Economic loss does not include losses incurred by the convicted person, damages for pain and suffering, punitive damages or consequential damages.

The question is whether, in a case like this, moving expenses are an economic loss within the meaning of the statute or, as the defendant argues, consequential damages. State v. Wideman, 165 Ariz. 364, 798 P.2d 1373 (App. 1990), is controlling. There, the court found that counseling expenses for a homicide victim's family were "directly attributable" to the offense, and therefore an appropriate item for restitution. Id. at 369, 798 P.2d at 1378. If the cost of psychological counseling for the victim of a violent crime is directly attributable to the crime, so are moving expenses incurred in an effort to restore the victim's equanimity. Restitution for moving expenses is doubly warranted in this case because of the very real threat to the victim's safety. We affirm the lower court's order for restitution of moving expenses.

GRANT, P.J., and EUBANK, J., concur.