Fleischer v. Commonwealth (P)

After the defendant’s conviction for felony unauthorized use of a motor vehicle, the circuit court didn’t abuse its discretion in ordering her to pay restitution in the amount necessary to replace the involved vehicles’ locks and cylinders, and to reprogram one car’s computer.

By unlawfully taking the victim’s vehicle and its contents, the defendant compromised the victim’s ability to protect her vehicles from unwanted intrusion. She abandoned the car, unlocked. Although the vehicle was recovered and returned to the victim, both sets of keys were missing. As a result, the locks on both cars no longer still functioned to limit access. And the court ordered restitution only for the cost of restoring a pre-existing security system rendered ineffective by the defendant’s criminal conduct.

Therefore, requiring the defendant to pay for changing the locks is not too remote or attenuated from the crime to establish an abuse of discretion. These costs were for losses directly caused by her criminal offense and did not go beyond making the victim whole.


Fleischer v. Commonwealth (P), No. 0220-18-3, Jan. 29, 2019. CAV (O’Brien) from Franklin (Perdue).

Categories: Court of Appeals of Virginia, Opinions, Published

Tags: ,

%d bloggers like this: