STATE v. ENSTONE

No. 65662-2.

974 P.2d 828 (1999)

137 Wash.2d 675

STATE of Washington, Respondent, v. Douglas ENSTONE, Petitioner.

Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc.

Decided April 15, 1999.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Kathryn A. Russell, Nielsen, Broman & Assoc., James R. Dixon, Seattle, for Petitioner.

Norm Maleng, King County Prosecutor, Lisa N. O'Toole and James Whisman, Deputies, Seattle, for Respondent.


ALEXANDER, J.

The sole issue presented by this appeal is whether the trial court erred in ordering the defendant, Douglas Enstone, to pay restitution for a crime victim's actual medical expenses absent a finding that the victim's injuries, for which the expenses were incurred, were foreseeable. We conclude that a finding of foreseeability is not a necessary element for a restitution order and, consequently, affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals' upholding the...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases