Attorney for Appellant Attorneys for Appellee
Monica Foster Pamela Carter
Hammerle Foster & Long-Sharp Attorney General of Indiana
501 Indiana Avenue, Suite 200 Preston W. Black
Indianapolis, IN 46202 Deputy Attorney General
Office of the Attorney General
Indiana Government Center
South, Fifth Floor
402 W. Washington Street
Indianapolis, IN 46204
RUSSELL W. ROACH, ) ) Indiana Supreme Court Petitioner (Defendant Below ), ) Cause No. 49S00-9512-CR-1324 ) v. ) ) STATE OF INDIANA ) ) Respondent (Plaintiff Below ). )
APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable Paula Lopossa, Judge
Ind. Code § 35-50-5-3(a) (Supp. 1994). On direct appeal, we interpreted our decision in Reinbold to permit a trial court to order a defendant to pay restitution for funeral and burial expenses incurred by the victim. Roach, 695 N.E.2d at 943. However, our decision in Reinbold did not directly address whether a trial court possessed the statutory authority to order a defendant to pay restitution for funeral and burial expenses, but instead, addressed whether a victim's survivors are victims and entitled to restitution within the meaning of the statute. 555
N.E.2d at 469-71. Therefore, this Court has not decided whether the trial court possesses the
authority to order a defendant to pay restitution for funeral and burial expenses.
A trial court's sentencing authority is limited to the statutory parameters prescribed by the General Assembly. See, e.g., Whitehead v. State, 511 N.E.2d 284, 296-97 (Ind. 1987); Kotsopoulos v. State, 654 N.E.2d 44, 46 (Ind. Ct. App. 1995). When construing a criminal statute, [w]ords and phrases shall be taken in their plain, or ordinary and usual, sense. Ind. Code § 1-1-4-1(1) (1998); see Matthews v. State, 515 N.E.2d 1105, 1106 (Ind. 1987). In this case, Indiana Code section 35-50-5-3 (Supp. 1994) authorized the trial court to base its restitution order on three types of damages; property damage, medical and hospital costs, and lost earnings. Restitution for funeral and burial expenses is not included within the plain and ordinary meaning of this statute. Also, as we noted on direct appeal, the General Assembly later amended this statute and enlarged a trial court's authority to order a defendant to pay restitution for funeral and burial expenses. Roach, 695 N.E.2d at 943 n.2. The trial court erred in this case by ordering Roach to pay restitution for funeral and burial expenses which were not specifically authorized by statute.
We find that the trial court did not possess the statutory authority to order Roach to pay restitution for funeral and burial expenses. We remand to the trial court to vacate the restitution order with respect to these expenses.
SHEPARD, C.J., and DICKSON, SULLIVAN, and BOEHM, JJ., concur.
Converted from WP6.1 by the Access Indiana Information Network