Arizona lawmakers cannot place a limit on the amount drivers must pay to their victims if they caused a serious or deadly crash.
The State Court of Appeals voided a law first enacted in 2006 limiting the amount victims may collect in restitution at $10,000. Last year, state lawmakers increased that amount to $100,000, but the court unanimously ruled that the cap, no matter how high, is unconstitutional.
The judges looked to the voter-approved Victims Bill of Rights added to the Arizona Constitution in 1990. It specifies victims are entitled to full "restitution," which the judges interpreted as allowing the victims to seek the amount needed to restore them to their economic status before the crash.
The case involves Vivek Patel, who was convicted of failing to yield when turning left, and causing a crash that seriously injured another individual.
In 2006, the Phoenix city prosecutor sought restitution of $61,192 on behalf of that victim, which the municipal judge awarded.
That decision, however, was overturned by Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Patricia Starr who said that compensation is limited by the $10,000 cap which was in effect at the time of the accident. She accepted Patel's argument that the language simply ensures "prompt'' compensation, and argued that if voters had intended to require "full'' restitution to victims they would have said so.
Judge Lawrence Winthrop, writing for the three-judge panel, pointed to dictionaries defining restitution as, "restoring someone to a position he (or she) occupied before a particular event.''
