INTEREST OF II v. << (2026)

W. Y., II, was adjudicated delinquent of theft by receiving a motor vehicle, fleeing or attempting to elude a police officer, possession of a handgun by a person under 18, and obstruction of a law enforcement officer, and he was placed on probation. Following a restitution hearing, W. Y. was ordered to pay $19,752.00 in restitution to the victim. W. Y. appeals the restitution award, asserting that the State failed to meet its burden of proving the value of the items by a preponderance of the evidence, the evidence was insufficient to determine the amount of restitution, and the trial court erred by admitting hearsay evidence regarding estimated damages and loss of personal property values. The State acknowledges that it failed to establish the vehicle's fair market value prior to the damage and that the trial court improperly overruled W. Y.’s objection to inadmissible hearsay regarding the victim's testimony about estimated damages and loss of personal property values.

In a case involving an automobile, “even when the cost to repair the vehicle is used as a measure of damages, evidence of the fair market value of the vehicle before it was damaged is required to determine whether the cost of repairs exceeded the vehicle's value.” Truss v. State, 373 Ga. App. 856, 858, 910 S.E.2d 339 (2024). Where the restitution evidence is insufficient to sustain the award, “we have consistently remanded the case for a new restitution hearing.” Id. Based on the foregoing, this Court hereby vacates the trial court's restitution award and remands the case to the trial court for a new restitution hearing.

Judgment vacated and case remanded.

Hodges, Judge.

Barnes, P. J., and Markle, J., concur.