Meredith, Leahy, Albright, Anne K. (Specially Assigned), JJ.
A.B., appeals from the restitution order of the Circuit Court
for Charles County, sitting as a juvenile court, entered
after Appellant admitted involvement in a second-degree
assault that left the victim with a broken nose and jaw.
Appellant presents one question for our review:
Whether the trial court erred by failing to make any inquiry
into Appellant's ability to pay the amount of restitution
Finding no error, we shall affirm the judgment of the circuit
October 5, 2015, the State filed a ten-count juvenile
petition alleging Appellant's involvement, along with two
co-respondents, in the July 24, 2015, assault of Justin M.,
then 20 years old, at the St. Charles Towne Center. On
November 12, 2015, pursuant to a plea agreement, Appellant
admitted involvement in one count of second-degree assault.
Prior to Appellant's plea, the State indicated that it
would be seeking restitution from Appellant and two
factual basis for Appellant's plea, the parties agreed
that Appellant and two co-respondents "began to punch
[Justin M.] repeatedly in a way that broke [Justin M.'s]
jaw and broke his nose. [Justin M.] was taken to George
Washington Hospital, in D.C., and his jaw was wired shut, and
there were many other health complications." As part of
its temporary disposition, the court scheduled a restitution
hearing for December 17, 2015.
restitution hearing, the State sought $19, 470 in restitution
for Justin M.'s medical expenses and lost wages, with
this amount to be divided among the three respondents. After
receiving evidence regarding the particulars of this sum, the
court received testimony and argument from Appellant
regarding his ability to pay. Disposition was then scheduled
for December 30, 2015.
December 30, 2015, the court held a disposition hearing.
After reviewing the Social History Investigation and
Recommendation (including an accompanying Psychological
Evaluation by Dr. Keith Hannan, Ph.D.) from the Department of
Juvenile Services, then confirming that neither side had any
corrections to it, and then hearing from the parties, the
court placed Appellant on a period of indefinite probation
and ordered, among other things, that he pay $6, 491.33 in
restitution to Justin M. through the Department of Juvenile
Services. No specific time limit or payment schedule was
timely appeal followed.
standards govern our review of a juvenile court restitution
order. Legal conclusions invite de novo review.
First-level findings of fact are reviewed for clear error.
And the decision to require restitution, as well as the
amount, are reviewed for abuse of discretion. See In re
Don Mc., 344 Md. 194, 201(1996); In re Earl F.,
208 Md.App. 269, 275, 275 n.2 (2012); In re Delric
H., 150 Md.App. 234, 240 (2003). Appellant concedes,
correctly, that the proper standard of review here is abuse
contends that the trial court erred by failing to make any
inquiry into Appellant's ability to pay the amount of
restitution ordered. The State counters that Respondent did
not preserve this argument and, in the alternative, that
given the evidence that was presented about Appellant's
ability to pay, the court's ...