James M. Ayres, Appellant-Defendant, v. State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff. (2026)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Statement of the Case

[1] James Ayres appeals the trial court's order of restitution following his conviction of Class B misdemeanor leaving the scene of an accident. Concluding that this issue is moot, we dismiss this appeal.

Facts and Procedural History

[2] In January 2025 while operating a motor vehicle, Ayres went off the roadway and damaged the landscaping of Otto Kasten. Ayres left the scene without notifying Kasten or law enforcement of the damage.

[3] Charges were filed, and in September Ayres pleaded guilty to Class B misdemeanor leaving the scene of a property damage accident, see Indiana Code section 9-26-1-1.1(a), and the trial court sentenced him to 180 days with 176 days suspended to probation. A restitution hearing was held on November 4, and the court ordered restitution in the amount of $4,703.41. From that total, the court deducted $2,248.38 for payment from Ayres’ auto insurance company to Kasten, leaving $2,275.00 remaining to be paid. The court set a restitution status hearing for February 2026, but prior to that time, Ayres moved to vacate the status hearing. The trial court granted the motion, and Ayres now appeals.

Discussion and Decision

[4] Ayres argues that the trial court erred by ordering him to pay $2,275 in additional restitution because that amount was arbitrary and is an amount he does not have the ability to pay. However, on November 18, 2025, Ayres moved to vacate the February 2026 status hearing for the reason that restitution was paid in full. Ayres set forth in his motion that his auto insurance company issued a check to Kasten for the remaining $2,275 ordered by the court and attached a copy of the receipt for the payment. Under these circumstances, the State contends the issue is moot.

[5] In general, a case is deemed moot when the controversy at issue has been ended, settled, or otherwise disposed of such that the court can provide no effective relief to the parties. Moore v. State, 30 N.E.3d 1241, 1245 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015). Therefore, in such instances it is unnecessary for the court to decide the question involved, and the case will be dismissed. Id. Although moot cases are typically dismissed, our courts have long recognized that a case may be decided on its merits under an exception to the general rule when the case involves a question of “ ‘great public interest.’ ” Id. (quoting In re Lawrance, 579 N.E.2d 32, 37 (Ind. 1991)).

[6] Here, Ayres’ restitution order was satisfied in full by a second check issued to Kasten from Ayres’ auto insurance carrier in the amount of $2,275, exactly the amount Ayres was ordered to pay. See Appellant's App. Confid. Vol. II, pp. 69-71. Consequently, his restitution issue is moot because there is no effective relief that can be rendered to Ayres by the Court. Cf. Spells v. State, 225 N.E.3d 767, 777-78 (Ind. 2024) (holding that appeal alleging required indigency determination was not made was not rendered moot by defendant's payment of fine, fees, and costs because effective relief would be reimbursement of money to defendant).

[7] Because Ayres’ insurance company has paid the full amount of the restitution order, Ayres has no further liability, there is nothing left to adjudicate, and we need not address the reasonableness of the restitution order given that we do not issue advisory opinions. See Reed v. State, 796 N.E.2d 771, 775 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (“This court does not render advisory opinions.”). As the issue is moot, we dismiss this appeal.

[8] Dismissed.

Najam, Senior Judge.

Tavitas, C.J., and Brown, J., concur.