What Really Happens at a Restitution Hearing?

Oct 20

(And Why It Matters to Fight for What’s Fair)

By Amanda Bynum, Tucson Criminal Defense Attorney

When most people think about sentencing in a criminal case, they think about jail, fines, or probation. What many don’t realize is that there's another piece that can have a lasting financial impact—and it often happens quietly, without much scrutiny.

That piece is restitution.

In Arizona, courts can order a person convicted of a crime to pay restitution to the alleged victim to compensate for economic losses. This might sound straightforward—if you break it, you buy it, right?

But in practice, restitution hearings can become contested, complex, and unfair—especially when claims are inflated, unsupported, or simply inaccurate.

As a criminal defense attorney in Tucson, I recently fought—and won—a particularly tough restitution hearing. I can’t disclose the names or exact facts (and wouldn’t want to), but I can share this: a several-thousand-dollar restitution claim was completely denied after we showed the court it didn’t meet the legal standard.

Let’s talk about how restitution works, why it matters, and why your attorney should never treat it as just an afterthought.

What Is a Restitution Hearing?

A restitution hearing is a court proceeding held to determine how much, if anything, a defendant must pay to a victim to compensate for financial harm caused by the crime. These hearings typically happen after a conviction or plea, and are part of sentencing.

Restitution in Arizona can include things like:

Property damage
Medical bills
Lost wages
Counseling or therapy costs
Repair or replacement of damaged items
Out-of-pocket expenses tied directly to the offense

Importantly, this is not an exhaustive list. Arizona courts have, in some cases, allowed claims for future lost wagesor other indirect losses—but every dollar must be tied to actual harm and supported by evidence.

Actual Loss vs. Speculation: The Legal Standard

Restitution isn’t about punishing the defendant further or making the victim feel better. It’s about economic loss actually sustained, and the burden is on the prosecution to prove that loss by a preponderance of the evidence.

What does that mean?

Think of it like a set of old-fashioned scales. If the State’s evidence tips the scale even slightly—just over 50%—they’ve met the standard. But they still need:

Reliable, admissible evidence
Proof that the loss was caused by the crime
A clear, rational connection between what’s claimed and what was actually lost

Restitution is not allowed for speculative, exaggerated, or hypothetical losses. And it's not meant to be a windfall or a second payday.

No Double Dipping: Insurance, Third-Party Coverage, and More

One critical part of the law that’s often misunderstood—even by victims and prosecutors—is that you can’t double dip.

If an insurance company, government program, or third party already paid for a loss, the victim cannot claim that amount again in restitution. Restitution is for unreimbursed economic loss only.

If a victim receives compensation from their own auto insurance or health provider, that amount should be subtracted from the total loss before restitution is even considered. If the State can't prove the amount still owed after those payments, they haven't met their burden.

The Case That Proved Why This Matters

In a recent hearing, my client admitted responsibility in a case involving property damage caused during a collision. There was no question that the underlying conduct happened, and my client accepted criminal liability.

But the alleged victim submitted a several-thousand-dollar repair estimate—not an invoice, not proof of payment, just a preliminary quote—from a body shop.

On paper, it seemed clean. But after careful review, we identified serious issues:

The photos didn’t show damage consistent with what the estimate claimed.
The estimate listed items like repainting the entire vehicle—with no explanation for why that was necessary for some minor scratches.
It even included charges for replacing parts—like a vehicle emblem—that weren’t damaged.
The estimate said “Insurance Pay” with a $0 deductible, but the victim claimed they had no insurance coverage at all.
And, most notably, the car was never repaired, even over a year after the incident.

When we challenged the claim, the prosecutor didn’t have an answer for those inconsistencies. And the victim didn’t appear to testify. Without the ability to ask questions or verify the estimate’s details, we argued the court couldn’t rely on it as "reliable hearsay"—and the judge agreed.

The entire restitution request was denied.

It Was a Hard Win—But a Fair One

This wasn’t an easy hearing. The request was made by someone who felt wronged. The prosecutor was ready to move forward. And the court could have rubber-stamped the number.

But we fought back—and we won.

Not because we were trying to get away with anything. Not because we disputed that something happened. But because restitution must be based on real, measurable loss—not on assumptions, exaggerations, or guesswork.

And because even small amounts of restitution can impact real lives.

Why This Matters, Even If You Pled Guilty

Here’s something I tell every client:

Just because you pled guilty doesn’t mean you agree to every dollar the prosecutor demands. You still have the right to fair treatment, and the State still has the burden to prove their case—including restitution.

Unfortunately, many defendants either:

Go to these hearings unrepresented
Have lawyers who tell them “it’s not worth fighting”
Or worse, agree to amounts that were never proven

That’s not how I practice.

Because for many clients, restitution isn’t a minor detail—it’s a financial obligation that lasts long after probation ends. And because the State doesn’t always get it right. Victims can overreach. Estimates can be padded. People can misrepresent their losses. And without a defense attorney who scrutinizes the evidence, those issues go unchallenged.

Restitution Can Be Challenged If…

A restitution claim can and should be challenged if:

It’s not supported by documentation (e.g., only an estimate, no receipt or invoice)
The evidence is internally inconsistent (like photos that don’t match the claimed loss)
It includes upgrades or betterments, rather than compensation for actual harm
The victim has already been compensated through insurance or another source
The costs appear exaggerated, inflated, or unrelated

It’s your attorney’s job to challenge these issues. And it’s the court’s job to make sure restitution is based on what was truly lost—not what someone hopes to get paid.

Why I Keep Fighting for Clients—Even After the Plea

Restitution is part of the sentencing process. It's not a technicality. It has long-term consequences. And when it's done wrong, it can create financial hardship that lasts for years.

I fight restitution because I believe:

Everyone deserves a fair outcome.
Clients deserve lawyers who care enough to scrutinize the details.
The system works best when no one assumes the paperwork is always right.

If you’re facing a restitution hearing in Tucson, Pima County, Marana, Sahuarita, Green Valley, or surrounding Arizona courts—don’t go into it blind. Let someone review the documents. Let someone ask the hard questions. Let someone fight for what’s fair.

Need Help With a Restitution Hearing? Let’s Talk.

At AJB Law Firm, I handle restitution hearings with the same level of care and strategy I bring to trials and motions. I don’t believe in coasting through sentencing. I believe in showing up, speaking up, and holding the State to its burden—every single time.

If you're facing a restitution claim—or if you're in the sentencing phase of a criminal case—I offer confidential consultations by phone.