IN RE: A.B.
Court of Special Appeals, Kehoe, Oct. 28, 2016,
Restitution- Where the juvenile court considered damages suffered and indirect evidence of ability to pay, it was not inappropriate to order significant restitution to be paid over several years.

Facts: A.B. and two other juveniles assaulted the victim and broke his jaw. Pursuant to a plea agreement, A.B. admitted involvement. The Department of Juvenile Services (DJS) submitted a report showing A.B.’s inability to pay. However, it noted that “[e]mployment is an age-appropriate experience, which challenges teens and teaches them valuable life lessons. In addition to this, it would help improve [A.B.’s] self-esteem and provide him an income.”
The court ordered that A.B. pay $6,491.33 over the course of five and a half years (when he turned 21 and the juvenile court lost jurisdiction).

Restitution-

CP 11-603 governs restitution judgments.

Restitution- In ordering restitution, the full compensation of the victim “should not overshadow [the juvenile court’s] primary duty to promote the rehabilitation of the defendant.”

Restitution – Where a juvenile respondent does not have the ability to pay restitution or there are extenuating circumstances that make restitution inappropriate, the juvenile court “need not” order it.

Restitution- If a court refuses to order restitution, it must state the reasons on the record