Court of Appeals of Arizona, First Division, Department E
Not for Publication-Rule 111, Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court
Appeal from the Superior Court of Maricopa County Cause No. CR2010-065403-001 The Honorable Janet E. Barton, Judge.
Thomas C. Horne, Attorney General Phoenix By Joseph T. Maziarz, Chief Counsel Criminal Appeals Jana Zinman, Assistant Attorney General Attorneys for Appellee.
James J. Haas, Maricopa County Public Defender Phoenix By Mark E. Dwyer, Deputy Public Defender Attorneys for Appellant.
JON W. THOMPSON, Judge.
¶1 Diane Lynn Habener (defendant) appeals the trial court's order awarding restitution to the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office (MCSO) in the amount of $6, 448.34. For the following reasons, we affirm.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
¶2 In September 2010, defendant was charged with sixteen counts of cruelty to animals, all class one misdemeanors, after MCSO seized a total of 114 dogs and cats from two properties where defendant operated animal rescue shelters. After a bench trial, the court convicted defendant of nine counts of cruelty to animals. The court suspended the imposition of sentencing and placed defendant on six years of supervised probation. This court affirmed defendant's convictions and sentences in State v. Habener, 1 CA-CR 11-0354 (App. Sep. 11, 2012) (mem. decision).
¶3 The court held hearings to determine restitution owed to MCSO pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) § 13-603(C) (2010). During the hearings, Sergeant Beckley testified about costs incurred from the animals' seizure, housing, and medical care, using invoices produced by Alta Vista Veterinary Hospital (Alta Vista). Expenses accrued due to various medications, medical tests, vaccinations, veterinarian examinations, and other medical and health-related services provided to the animals. Sergeant Beckley testified that some treatments were recommended by veterinarians and some were part of MCSO's routine care for seized animals. She further testified that no treatment was unreasonable or needless.
¶4 The state requested $8, 373.58 in restitution. This amount represented MCSO's expenses for the nine animals relating to defendant's convictions. The court awarded restitution to MCSO in the amount of $6, 448.34, ruling that these expenses were "properly recoverable."
¶5 We have jurisdiction pursuant to Article 6, Section 9 of the Arizona Constitution, and A.R.S. §§ 12-120.21(A)(1) (2003) and 13-4031 (2010).
¶6 We review a court's restitution order for abuse of discretion. State v. Slover, 220 Ariz. 239, 242, ¶ 4, 204 P.3d 1088, 1091 (App. 2009). A court abuses its discretion when it misapplies the law or bases its decision on incorrect legal principles. Id. We view the facts in the light most favorable to affirming the court's findings, and we will not reweigh the evidence. In ...