State v. Clay, No. 1 CA-CR 22-0571(App. Div. I, August 1, 2023) (J. Kiley) https://www.azcourts.gov/Portals/0/OpinionFiles/Div1/2023/1%20CA-CR%2022-0571%20State%20v.%20Clay%20OP.pdf

RESTITUTION PAYMENTS MAY BE ORDERED TO BE PAID TO “ANY PERSON” WHO SUFFERS ECONOMIC LOSS CAUSED BY DEFENDANT INCLUDING A PERSON OTHER THAN THE VICTIM OR IMMEDIATE FAMILY MEMBERS

The Maricopa County Victim Compensation Program [Program] paid funeral expenses of $1,422 to the next of kin of defendant's murder victim and the court ordered defendant to reimburse the Program. Defendant appealed arguing that the court did not have statutory authority under A.R.S. §§ 13-603(C) and -804(A) to make such an award because the Program was not the victim or the victim's immediate family.  The Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court.

A.R.S. §13- -804(A) expressly authorizes restitution awards to  “any person who suffered an economic loss caused by the defendant's conduct.”  

By paying Victim's funeral expenses, the Program stepped

into her family's shoes, bearing an economic loss her family would

otherwise have suffered. See State v. Prieto, 172 Ariz. 298, 299 (App. 1992)

(affirming restitution award to non-victim entity that paid for victim's

counseling, thereby “stand[ing] in the shoes of the victim” who “would

unquestionably be entitled to restitution” had she “spent her own money”

for counseling). Because § 13-804(E) requires defendants to pay restitution

to insurance companies and victim compensation funds that bear the

economic losses of the defendants' crimes, we hold that § 13-804(E)

provides the statutory basis for the superior court's restitution order.