Restitution; Amendment of a restitution order based on “new or updated information” about the losses; MCL 780.766(22); MCR 6.430(A)

The court held that an insurance company’s request, made before sentencing, for restitution to cover the costs used to make the victim whole was not new information that allowed amendment of a restitution order under MCL 780.766(22) and MCR 6.430(A). Thus, the trial court erred in granting “the prosecution’s motion to reopen the record and amend defendant’s sentence to include $3,640 in restitution.” He pled no contest to larceny of $1,000 or more but less than $20,000, He was initially sentenced to 24 months’ probation and 365 days in jail, with the balance of jail time temporarily suspended. He argued the trial court erred in granting the prosecution’s later motion for restitution. The court agreed. Pursuant to MCL 780.766(22), “a ‘court may amend an order of restitution . . . on a motion by the prosecuting attorney, the victim, or the defendant based upon new information related to the injury, damages, or loss for which the restitution was ordered.’” In addition, MCR 6.430(A) permits “amendment of a restitution order based on ‘new or updated information’ regarding the losses.” The court noted “the insurance company’s request predated defendant’s sentence by four months.” Another four months passed after his sentencing before the prosecution moved to request restitution. Thus, “the information contained in the request was at least eight months old before the prosecution presented it to the trial court. A plain interpretation of this situation indicates that the information had not recently come into existence.” While the prosecution asserted this was “immaterial because the information was new to the trial court, . . . MCR 6.430(A) and MCL 780.766(22) do not specify that the information’s ‘newness’ must be from the” trial court’s perspective. Further, the only reason “the trial court did not consider the insurance company’s request at sentencing was because the prosecution failed to bring that information to [its] attention despite the information being readily available, and the prosecution bears the burden to present restitution-request information to the trial court.” Reversed and remanded for amendment of “defendant’s sentence to remove the restitution order.”