Restitution; MCL 769.1a(2); The Crime Victim’s Rights Act; MCL 780.766(2); Causation; People v Corbin

Holding that there was sufficient evidence to prove that defendant caused the alleged damages, the court affirmed the order requiring him to pay $16,977.71 in restitution. He pled guilty to second-degree home invasion. He did “not contest that the victim actually incurred $16,977.71 worth of damage.” Instead, he asserted “there was insufficient evidence to prove causation because the prosecution presented no witness testimony or forensic evidence demonstrating that he was the one who caused the damage.” However, he did not “identify any statute or caselaw showing that such evidence is required. Moreover, testimony from responding police officers and the victim indicated that: (1) the house was in good condition before the victim left town; (2) defendant was the only person found in the victim’s house; (3) defendant was found in the home a few hours after the victim’s neighbor alerted him of the break-in; and (4) the state of the house—i.e., open food, feces in the bathroom, and defendant’s medication—suggested that [he] had been there for an extended period of time.” The court noted that he “admitted he was in the house for a minimum of 9 to 12 hours.” Thus, it held that the trial court did not clearly err in “finding that defendant’s unlawful entry factually and proximately caused the claimed damage.” While he denied that he caused it, “the only evidence he presented to negate the officers’ and victim’s testimonies was his own. Thus, the question of whether there was sufficient evidence to satisfy the burden of proof hinged on the trial court’s credibility determination” and the court does not interfere with this.