An appellate court in Kansas has affirmed a trial court's decision ordering a criminal defendant who pleaded guilty to burglary and felony theft to pay restitution to both the victim of his crimes and to a subrogation company hired by the victim's insurance company.
The Case
Antonio Raymond Blaylock pleaded guilty to burglary and felony theft. According to the presentence investigation report (“PSI”), the victim requested $500 in restitution to pay her insurance deductible. The PSI also indicated that Paragon Subrogation Services requested $2,903.65 in restitution to cover the amount that its client, Allstate Insurance, had paid out under the victim's insurance policy. The total amount of restitution requested was $3,403.65.
The trial court sentenced Blaylock to 36 months in prison but granted him probation for 24 months. The victim's restitution request was not contested, but Blaylock objected to the state's request that he pay Paragon, arguing that insurance companies should not benefit from restitution because they received premiums in exchange for covering losses under the policy.
The trial court overruled Blaylock's objection and ordered Blaylock to pay the total amount of restitution requested in the PSI.
Blaylock appealed, arguing that the trial court did not have the statutory authority to grant Paragon restitution because it was not an aggrieved party under K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 21–6607(c).
Kansas Law
Kansas law provides that, in addition to other conditions of probation, a trial court shall order the defendant to:
make reparation or restitution to the aggrieved party for the damage or loss caused by the defendant's crime.
K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 21–6607(c)(2).
The Appellate Court's Decision
The appellate court affirmed, ruling that Paragon was an aggrieved party under K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 21–6607(c)(2).
In its decision, the appellate court reasoned that Allstate, as the insurance company that paid the victim according to her policy, had become an aggrieved party, and that Paragon, as a subrogation company hired by Allstate, merely had taken Allstate's place as an aggrieved party.
“Allstate essentially transferred its loss to Paragon,” the appellate court noted. The appellate court held that because Paragon had been hired to take the place of its client who had suffered a loss created by Blaylock's crimes, Paragon was an aggrieved party. Therefore, it concluded, the trial court had not erred in ordering Blaylock to pay Paragon restitution.
The case is State of Kansas v. Blaylock, No. 114,789 (Kan. Ct.App. March 3, 2017). Attorneys involved include: Sam Schirer, of Kansas Appellate Defender Office, for appellant. Steven J. Obermeier, senior deputy district attorney, James Crux, legal intern, Stephen M. Howe, district attorney, and Derek Schmidt, attorney general, for appellee.
Learn more:
Steven A. Meyerowitz
Steven A. Meyerowitz, a Harvard Law School graduate, is the founder and president of Meyerowitz Communications Inc., a law firm marketing communications consulting company. He may be contacted at [email protected].