Not for Publication – Rule 111(c), Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court
Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. JV198465 The Honorable Utiki Spurling Laing, Judge Pro Tempore
Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Andrea L. Kever Counsel for Appellant
Maricopa County Public Advocate, Mesa By Lori A. Leon Counsel for Appellee
Judge Kent E. Cattani delivered the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Diane M. Johnsen and Judge John C. Gemmill joined.
¶1 The State of Arizona appeals from the juvenile court's denial of its untimely request for a restitution hearing. For reasons that follow, we vacate the juvenile court's ruling and remand for further proceedings consistent with this decision.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
¶2 In early August 2014, 13-year-old Abel H. put another boy in a headlock as part of a game. The boy lost consciousness and suffered a laceration to his head after falling. The State thereafter charged Abel with felony aggravated assault and initiated delinquency proceedings.
¶3 In October 2014, the victim filed a Verified Victim Statement of Financial Loss ("VVS") indicating over $2, 400 in medical expenses resulting from Abel's actions. On November 7, 2014, Abel pled guilty to misdemeanor aggravated assault, and the juvenile court-proceeding immediately to disposition-placed him on standard probation.
¶4 The court did not address restitution at the disposition hearing, but rather deferred consideration until a later date. The juvenile probation officer noted at the time that the victim had already filed a VVS for medical expenses, and Abel's counsel acknowledged receiving the VVS and discussing it with Abel and his mother. The State indicated, however, that it intended to follow up with the victim about any additional restitution he might seek. The court set a deadline of December 5, 2014 for the victim to submit a VVS and a deadline of December 19, 2014 for the State to request a restitution hearing.
¶5 No supplemental VVS was filed, and the State missed the December 19 deadline for requesting a restitution hearing. On January 12, 2015, the State filed a hearing request, noting that the victim had filed a VVS with the court in October, but offering no explanation for the untimely filing. In response, Abel acknowledged that a VVS was filed before the deadline, but objected to the State's request solely because it was untimely. The court denied the State's request for a restitution hearing "[f]or the reasons set forth in the Defense's objection."
¶6 The State timely appealed,  and we have jurisdiction under Arizona Revised Statutes ("A.R.S.") ...