Cases from cite.case.law:

TOLBERT, v. STATE, 268 So. 3d 947 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . State , 688 So.2d 913, 915 (Fla. 1997) (referencing § 775.089(1)(a) ). . . . Williams , the Florida Supreme Court noted that section 775.089(1)(a)'s "directly or indirectly" limitation . . . damages that "would have occurred with or without" the offense. 520 So.2d 276, 277 (Fla. 1988) (" Section 775.089 . . . criminal conduct caused" "would raise significant due process concerns regard the validity of section 775.089 . . . . § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. . . . . § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. . . . See § 775.089 (1)(a), Fla. . . .

TOOLE, v. STATE, 270 So. 3d 371 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . Section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes, provides: Any dispute as to the proper amount or type of restitution . . . Three, the burden of proof is preponderance of the evidence. § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2018). . . . : A CALL TO THE LEGISLATURE TO REVISE SECTION 775.089, FLORIDA STATUTES, GOVERNING RESTITUTION * * * . . . Specifically, the court recommended adding the following language to section 775.089(7) : "The court . . . Stat. § 775.089(6)(a) (2014). Russell v. . . .

S. S. a v. STATE, 261 So. 3d 704 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . This statute has been interpreted similarly to the adult restitution statute, section 775.089(1)(a), . . .

M. P. v. STATE, 256 So. 3d 231 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . , ability to pay is considered in enforcement proceedings after the court orders restitution, see § 775.089 . . . State, 993 So.2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (en banc) (noting that section 775.089(6) previously required . . .

ROBINSON, v. STATE, 256 So. 3d 217 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . See §§ 775.089(1)(c)1., 938.27(8), Fla. Stat. (2015). . . .

SAINVIL, v. STATE, 248 So. 3d 148 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . (citing § 775.089(6), Fla. Stat. (1993) ). . . .

SILKY, v. STATE, 238 So. 3d 810 (Fla. App. Ct. 2017)

. . . ." § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2017). . . .

KUMAR, v. C. PATEL,, 227 So. 3d 557 (Fla. 2017)

. . . For example, sections 772.14 and 775.089(8), Florida Statutes, expressly restrict the doctrine of mutuality . . .

JAMES, v. STATE, 223 So. 3d 288 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Pursuant to section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2013), a defendant must pay restitution for damage . . .

PARAGUE, v. STATE, 222 So. 3d 567 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . With regard to the trial court’s imposition of restitution, section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2015), . . . the amount of the loss sustained by a victim as a result of the offense is on the state attorney. § 775.089 . . .

STATE v. SANDOMENO,, 217 So. 3d 110 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2015) provides that “the court shall order the defendant to . . . “Section 775.089(l)(a) requires the trial court to order a defendant to make restitution for damage or . . .

A. J. A. a v. STATE, 215 So. 3d 639 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . See § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2016); Santana v. State, 795 So.2d 1112, 1113 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). . . .

JOHNSON, v. STATE, 207 So.3d 1030 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Appellant argues that pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2013), the trial court erred in . . . But section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (2013), provides in relevant part that “[a]ny dispute as to . . .

HOLT, v. STATE, 220 So. 3d 455 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . State, 139 So.3d 458, 459 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014); § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. . . .

NOEL, v. STATE v., 191 So. 3d 370 (Fla. 2016)

. . . . § 775.089(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (2010); see also § 775.089(6)(a), Fla. . . . restitution order, trial courts are required to consider the defendant’s- financial resources. - See § 775.089 . . . See § 775.089(6), Fla. . . .

J. CURTIS, v. STATE, 187 So. 3d 947 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . Section 775.089, Florida Statutes, requires the trial court to consider the amount of loss and the defendant . . . ’s ability to pay. § 775.089(6)(a)-(b), Fla. . . .

STATE v. RICHARD,, 197 So. 3d 1097 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . (k) An order denying restitution under s. 775.089. . . .

LATHAM, v. STATE, 185 So. 3d 686 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . Defense counsel cited the general restitution.statute, section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2012) . . . The general restitution statute, section 775.089, includes similar language. . . . ALTENBERND and KHOUZAM, JJ„ Concur. .Section 775.089 provides: (l)(a) In addition to any punishment, . . . 775.089(1)(c) contains a definition of “vi.ctim” that, by its terms, appears to apply to restitution . . . Section 775.089(1)(c) states that "[t]he term ‘victim’ as used in this section and in any provision of . . .

E. G. a v. STATE, 180 So. 3d 1152 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . . § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2014); see § 985.437, Fla. Stat. (2014); A.G. v. . . . to current section 985.437, “is treated the same as restitution in adult proceedings under section 775.089 . . .

J. STROUT, v. STATE, 180 So. 3d 1052 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Section 775.089, Florida Statutes, requires a defendant to make restitution to a victim for “[djamage . . . by the defendant’s offense,” and “[d]amage or loss related to' the defendant’s criminal episode.” § 775.089 . . . injury or death as a direct or indirect result of the defendant’s offense or criminal episode ....”§ 775.089 . . .

STATE v. TOMASHESKI,, 168 So. 3d 248 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . It argues the trial court should have used the “significant relationship” test under section 775.089( . . . Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2012), provides the answer to the first question: (l)(a) In addition . . . defendant’s criminal episode, unless it finds clear and compelling reasons not to order such restitution. § 775.089 . . . Section 775.089(7) further provides that “[a]ny dispute as to the proper amount or type of restitution . . . shall be resolved by the court by the preponderance of the evidence.” § 775.089(7), Fla. . . .

L. W. a v. STATE, 163 So. 3d 598 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . . § 775.089(6)(b), Fla. Stat. (2014); Del Valle v. State, 80 So.3d 999, 1006-07 (Fla.2011). . . .

WHITE, v. STATE, 190 So. 3d 99 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . restitution must be imposed at sentencing or within sixty days thereafter, in accordance with Section 775.089 . . .

S. M. v. STATE, 159 So. 3d 966 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Hawthorne, 573 So.2d at 333 (quoting section 775.089(6), Fla. Stat. (1987)). . . .

STATE v. MADDEX,, 159 So. 3d 267 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Under section 924.07(1)(k), the State may appeal “[a]n order denying restitution under s. 775.089.” § . . .

K. R. a v. STATE, 155 So. 3d 507 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (2012), states: “Any dispute as to the proper amount or type of . . .

SCHENK, v. STATE, 150 So. 3d 275 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . . § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2013). “Restitution must be proved by substantial competent evidence.” . . . thereby leading to an unjust result, the court recommended that “our state legislature revisit section 775.089 . . .

VASQUEZ, v. STATE, 162 So. 3d 117 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . restitution must be imposed at sentencing or within sixty days thereafter, in accordance with Section 775.089 . . .

PRINZ, v. STATE, 149 So. 3d 65 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2010), which governs restitution, provides that “the court shall order . . . ’s criminal episode, unless it finds clear and convincing reasons not to order such restitution.” § 775.089 . . . The State has the burden of, showing any amount of loss by a preponderance of the evidence. § 775.089 . . .

R. PHILLIPS, v. STATE, 141 So. 3d 702 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . Based on the foregoing, we recommend that our state legislature revisit section 775.089, Florida Statutes . . . We recommend the following underlined revision to section 775.089(7): Any dispute as to the proper amount . . .

ELMER, v. STATE, 140 So. 3d 1132 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . See § 775.089(2)(c), Fla. . . .

DJR, a v. STATE, 139 So. 3d 458 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . Childers, 979 So.2d 412, 414 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008); § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. . . .

PROFESSIONAL ROOFING AND SALES, INC. v. FLEMMINGS,, 138 So. 3d 524 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . For example, sections 772.14 and 775.089 of the Florida Statutes aid crime victims in obtaining a civil . . . judgment or decree would be an estoppel as if the plaintiff had been a party in the criminal action. 775.089 . . . Stat. (2014); § 775.089(8), Fla. Stat (2014) (emphasis supplied); see J & P Transp., Inc. v. . . . Co. of N.Y., 750 So.2d 752, 753 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (recognizing that sections 772.14 and 775.089(8) . . . Fui'thermore, as noted by the Florida Supreme Court, sections 775.089(8) and 772.14 did not abolish the . . .

STATE v. DAVIS,, 133 So. 3d 1101 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . Sanderson, 625 So.2d 471 (Fla.1993); § 775.089, Fla. . . .

J. W. A. a v. STATE, 128 So. 3d 912 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . Victims of crime in Florida are entitled to restitution, § 775.089, Florida Statutes, the award of which . . . Childers, 979 So.2d 412, 415 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (citing section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (2007)) . . . The State’s statutory burden to prove restitution is the preponderance of the evidence standard. § 775.089 . . . See § 775.089, Fla. Stat. . . .

NOEL, v. STATE, 127 So. 3d 769 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . To that end, trial courts are required by our restitution statute, section 775.089, Florida Statutes, . . . The majority also cites section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes, as authority for the trial court’s ability . . . However, section 775.089(6) applies when the trial court orders restitution as a condition of probation . . . Section 775.089(6) relieves a trial court from having to determine a defendant’s ability to pay when . . . Section 775.089(5), Florida Statutes, authorizes the state or the victim to enforce an order of restitution . . . See § 775.089(6)(a), Fla. Stat. (2010); Del Valle v. State, 80 So.3d 999, 1006 (Fla.2011). . . . See § 775.089(l)(a), Fla. . . . See § 775.089(5), Fla. Stat. (2010). . . . See § 775.089(12)(a), Fla. Stat. (2010). . . . Section 775.089(6)(a), Florida Statutes (2010), provides that “in determining whether to order restitution . . . the defendant’s offense” and for “[djamage or loss related to the defendant’s criminal episode.” § 775.089 . . . Where ordered, restitution is a mandatory condition of probation or parole. § 775.089(4), Fla. . . . Del Valle, 80 So.3d at 1006; see § 775.089(6), Fla. Stat. (1993). . . .

D. E. M. a v. STATE, 109 So. 3d 1229 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . .” § 775.089(l)(a)l.-2., Fla. Stat. (2011). . . . .” § 775.089(6)(a). . . . . § 775.089(7). We review the restitution order for an abuse of discretion. Bennett v. . . .

ANGRY, v. STATE, 102 So. 3d 767 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . The appellant challenges a restitution order which was entered pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Statutes . . .

DAGERATH, v. STATE, 100 So. 3d 1260 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . Section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2010), provides, in pertinent part: In addition to any punishment . . . defendant’s criminal episode, unless it finds clear and compelling reasons not to order such restitution. § 775.089 . . .

FERNANDEZ, v. STATE, 98 So. 3d 730 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . Section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (2008), provides that for purposes of restitution the burden to . . .

G. ANTON, v. STATE, 92 So. 3d 876 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . that the trial court had the authority to enter civil liens and income deduction orders under section 775.089 . . . Two statutory provisions must be applied for proper resolution of this case: section 775.089(3), which . . . Prior to October 1, 1993, section 775.089(3) required immediate payment unless the court ordered otherwise . . . Prior to October 1, 1993, section 775.089(5) provided: “An order of restitution may be enforced by the . . . Effective October 1, 1993, the legislature amended section 775.089(5) to read: (5) An order of restitution . . .

IANIERI, v. STATE, 84 So. 3d 1263 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . Section 775.089(3)(c), Florida Statutes, provides that a trial court has jurisdiction to enforce restitution . . . , to be paid within a certain period or in installments. § 775.089(3)(c), Fla. . . . If the court does not otherwise provide a time period, “restitution must be made immediately.” § 775.089 . . . consider the financial resources of the defendant” in making determinations regarding restitution. § 775.089 . . .

WILCOX, v. STATE, 79 So. 3d 878 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . The trial court’s order found that the lien was permissible under section 775.089, Florida Statutes. . . . State, 944 So.2d 488, 492 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (Sawaya, J., concurring) (explaining that section 775.089 . . .

BIANCHINI, v. STATE, 77 So. 3d 247 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . .” § 775.089(l)(a)1.2., Fla. Stat. (2005). . . .

DEL VALLE, v. STATE, 80 So. 3d 999 (Fla. 2011)

. . . See § 775.089, Fla. Stat. (2011). . . . , the amount of damage or loss sustained by the victim, see id. § 775.089(7). . . . See § 775.089(5); see also Sims v. State, 637 So.2d 21, 23 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). . . . .” § 775.089(6)(b). . . . See id. § 775.089(5)-(6); see also Banks v. . . . Stat. (2011)); (2) when the State or the victim attempts to enforce the restitution order (§ 775.089( . . . To the contrary, section 775.089(6)(a), Florida Statutes (2011), provides: “The court, in determining . . . Section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1995), provides that ability to pay shall be considered at the . . . or s. 985.437, and of the victim’s rights of enforcement under ss. 775.089(6) and 985.0301 [] in the . . . Section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes, discusses the applicable burdens: Any dispute as to the proper . . .

M. P. v. STATE, 66 So. 3d 1055 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . See § 775.089(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (2009). . . .

FAURISMA, v. STATE, 61 So. 3d 497 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . See § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2009); Iaconetti, 869 So.2d at 700. Reversed and remanded. . . .

K. N. a v. STATE, 61 So. 3d 1258 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . See § 775.089(1)(b)(2) (“A plea agreement may contain provisions that order restitution relating to criminal . . . defendant’s offense” and whether that “[d]amage or loss related to the defendant’s criminal episode.” § 775.089 . . . To order restitution under section 775.089, the State must prove that the loss or damage for which the . . . See § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2010); Watson v. State, 699 So.2d 835, 836 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). . . . See § 775.089(1)(b)(2) (“A plea agreement may contain provisions that order restitution relating to criminal . . .

GRIFFIS, v. FLORIDA FISH WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION,, 57 So. 3d 929 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . coverage as a “penalty,” because it was ordered as “restitution” under the general provisions of section 775.089 . . .

DOMINGUEZ, Jr. v. MIAMI- DADE COUNTY,, 416 F. App'x 884 (11th Cir. 2011)

. . . awarding it $21,705.00 on its state law counterclaims for civil theft and conversion under §§ 772.11 and 775.089 . . .

REDDEN, III, v. STATE, 56 So. 3d 79 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . See § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2007); Gilileo v. State, 923 So.2d 612, 614 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). . . .

STATE v. COHN,, 51 So. 3d 610 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . . § 775.089(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (2009). . . . . § 775.089(8). . . . remand for further proceedings to determine the amount of restitution in accordance with the statute. § 775.089 . . .

HUNTER, v. STATE, 48 So. 3d 174 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . Section 775.089, Florida Statutes, permits a trial court to order a defendant to make restitution for . . . damages or losses caused by the defendant’s offense. § 775.089(l)(a), Fla. . . . by the preponderance of the evidence the loss sustained by the victim as a result of the offense. § 775.089 . . .

L. SCHUMMER, v. STATE, 46 So. 3d 1229 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . See § 775.089(8), Fla. Stat. . . . But pursuant to section 775.089(8) and the final judgment in the civil proceedings, Appellant is entitled . . .

J. STANLEY, v. STATE, 42 So. 3d 330 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . s attorney argues that the Florida Crimes Compensation Fund is not a “victim” as defined in section 775.089 . . . injury or death as a direct or indirect result of the defendant’s offense or criminal episode ....”§ 775.089 . . . We do not decide in this case whether a government agency is a “person” for purposes of section 775.089 . . . 1997) (holding sheriffs department did not meet the statutory definition of “victim” under section 775.089 . . .

CUMMINGS, v. STATE, 39 So. 3d 555 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2008), provides as follows: (l)(a) In addition to any punishment, . . .

GONZALEZ, v. STATE, 40 So. 3d 86 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . The trial court awarded restitution as follows: At this point, the Statute 775.089 requires the Court . . .

W. MYERS, v. STATE, 37 So. 3d 978 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . judge shall amend the sentencing documents to reflect that pursuant to the 1989 version of section 775.089 . . .

STATE v. SHIELDS,, 31 So. 3d 281 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . See § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2008); Hector v. State, 784 So.2d 1207, 1208 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). . . . See Hector, 784 So.2d at 1208 (citing § 775.089(6)(b), Fla. Stat. (2000), and Pickett v. . . .

JOHNSON, v. STATE, 27 So. 3d 211 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . Section 775.089(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2008), permits restitution for a victim’s psychological care . . .

STATE v. FORD,, 27 So. 3d 725 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . White, 755 So.2d 830, 832 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); see § 775.089, Fla. . . .

CANERDAY, v. STATE, 37 So. 3d 272 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . . § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2007); Glaubius v. State, 688 So.2d 913, 916 (Fla.1997). . . . See § 775.089(7). Thus, the trial court erred in including the $1275.58 in the restitution award. . . .

COOKS, v. STATE, 23 So. 3d 863 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . . § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. . . .

C. CARTER, v. STATE, 23 So. 3d 1238 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . Section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2007), requires that a court “order the defendant to make restitution . . . “Subsections 775.089(6) and (7) require a hearing! . . . See § 775.089(6)(b), Fla. Stat. (2007); Filmore v. State, 656 So.2d 535 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). . . .

DOMINGUEZ, Jr. v. MIAMI- DADE COUNTY,, 669 F. Supp. 2d 1340 (S.D. Fla. 2009)

. . . Section 775.089(8), Florida Statutes, provides: The conviction of a defendant for an offense involving . . .

G. M. H. v. STATE, 18 So. 3d 728 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2007), provides, in pertinent part, as follows: (6)(a) The court, . . .

J. CHERRY, v. STATE, 15 So. 3d 774 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . Eight and one-half months later, the trial court entered a restitution order under section 775.089(5) . . . Section 775.089(l)(a) provides, in pertinent part: In addition to any punishment, the court shall order . . . See § 775.089(7); Glaubius, 688 So.2d at 915; Bellot v. . . .

RITCH, v. STATE, 14 So. 3d 1104 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . . § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. (2005). . . . indirectly, some loss “related to the defendant's criminal episode" of dealing in stolen property. § 775.089 . . . Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2005), provides in part: (l)(a) In addition to any punishment, the . . .

SAMUELS, v. STATE, 11 So. 3d 413 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . order of restitution as to the cost of medical insurance was contemplated and permitted by section 775.089 . . .

L. R. L. v. STATE, 9 So. 3d 714 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . .” § 775.089(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (2007). . . .

E. D. B. a v. STATE, 5 So. 3d 787 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . The terms of the restitution order are subject to s. 775.089(5). . . . Further, “[t]he terms of the restitution order are subject to [section] 775.089(5),” Florida Statutes . . . Section 775.089(5) addresses the mechanism for enforcement of a restitution order: An order of restitution . . . Reading sections 985.0301(5)(i) and 775.089(5) together, we conclude that costs, interests, penalties . . . interest, costs and attorney’s fees associated with the enforcement of a restitution order under section 775.089 . . .

C. M. S. v. STATE, 997 So. 2d 520 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . See § 775.089(l)(a), Fla. . . .

J. C. v. STATE, 3 So. 3d 346 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . See § 775.089(7), Fla. . . .

McCLINTOCK, v. STATE, 995 So. 2d 1147 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . The State argues that under section 775.089(3) of the Florida Statutes the trial court possessed jurisdiction . . . Section 775.089(3) provides in relevant part: 775.089. . . . duration of the civil judgment provision set forth in subsection (5) and as provided in s. 55.10. § 775.089 . . .

J. A. B. v. STATE, 993 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . issues involved, but this court has previously looked to the general restitution statute for adults, § 775.089 . . . Section 775.089(7) provides that the court must determine restitution based upon a preponderance of the . . . Notably, although section 775.089(6) previously required a court ordering restitution in an adult case . . . Stat. (1993), subsections 775.089(6)(a) and (b) now require the court to consider only the amount of . . . Indeed, the opinion in Bain was based upon the prior version of section 775.089(6), which required the . . .

SIMS, v. STATE, 998 So. 2d 494 (Fla. 2008)

. . . We reasoned that section 775.089(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2001), which states that restitution shall . . .

SEBASTIANO, v. SCLAFANI, LLC,, 984 So. 2d 673 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . crime victim is entitled to pursue both a criminal restitution award and a civil damages award, section 775.089 . . .

G. DIAZ, v. ANDY,, 987 So. 2d 698 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . Section 775.089(8), Florida Statutes (2006), provides in part: "An order of restitution hereunder will . . . crime victim is entitled to pursue both a criminal restitution award and a civil damages award, section 775.089 . . .

STATE v. CHILDERS,, 979 So. 2d 412 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . See § 775.089(1)(a), Fla. Stat.; Glaubius v. State, 688 So.2d 913, 915 (Fla.1997). . . . See § 775.089(1)(a)1.-2., Fla. Stat. . . . reasons for denying restitution, and providing “clear and compelling reasons not to order restitution.” § 775.089 . . . convictions; reversed the trial court’s ruling that the county was not a “victim” for purposes of section 775.089 . . . rests with the state to prove the amount of the victim’s loss by the greater weight of the evidence. § 775.089 . . .

ALBERTIE, v. STATE, 979 So. 2d 1086 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . See § 775.089(l)(c), Fla. . . . Section 775.089(l)(c) provides: The term "victim” as used in this section and in any provision of law . . .

S. KITTELSON, v. STATE, 980 So. 2d 533 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . . § 775.089(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (2007). . . . . § 775.089(l)(b)(l), Fla. Stat. (2007). . . .

T. J. N. v. STATE, 977 So. 2d 770 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . The general statute governing restitution awards, section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2006), provides . . . See § 775.089(l)(a)(l) (providing for restitution for “[d]amage or loss caused directly or indirectly . . . See § 775.089(l)(a)(2) (providing for restitution for “[djamage or loss related to the defendant’s criminal . . .

MALARKEY, v. STATE, 975 So. 2d 538 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . Section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2005), provides that the court may order a defendant to make . . .

SCHNEIDER, v. STATE, 972 So. 2d 1079 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . Section 775.089(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2006), provides that: In addition to any punishment, the court . . . physical injury or death as a direct or indirect result of the defendant’s offense or criminal episode_” § 775.089 . . . See § 775.089(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (2006); Bernard, v. State, 859 So.2d 560 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). . . . I disagree with the far too narrow application of section 775.089 and therefore dissent. . . .

SORIANO, v. STATE, 968 So. 2d 112 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . . § 775.089(l)(a), Fla. Stat. . . . . § 775.089(7), Fla. Stat. . . .

RODRIGUEZ, v. STATE, 964 So. 2d 833 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . the deputy’s injuries and restitution for the cost of his medical treatment was proper under section 775.089 . . .

L. BELLOT, v. STATE, 964 So. 2d 857 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . . § 775.089(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (2005). . . . Pay the cost of necessary physical and occupational therapy and rehabilitation. § 775.089(2)(a). . . . State, 902 So.2d 822, 824 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005); see also § 775.089(7). . . . State, 688 So.2d 913, 915 (Fla.1997) (citing § 775.089(7)). . . . court in Schuette made it clear that, notwithstanding the relatively open-ended wording of section 775.089 . . .

STATE v. CASTRO,, 965 So. 2d 216 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2006), states, in relevant part: (l)(a) In addition to any punishment . . . does not order restitution, or orders restitution of only a portion of the damages, as provided in s. 775.089 . . . Given the statutory requirements of both sections 775.089 and 948.03 that restitution be imposed absent . . . See Section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (2006).- See also Hitchmon, 678 So.2d at 463 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996 . . . See Section 775.089(l)(b)l. Reversed and remanded. SHEPHERD, J., concurs. . . . . In the absence of any such evidence, the trial court denied restitution pursuant to section 775.089(7 . . . the most “clear and compelling” reasons for a trial court not to award a request for restitution. § 775.089 . . . establishing by a preponderance of the evidence the amount it and/or the victim seeks in. restitution. § 775.089 . . .

I. M. a v. STATE, 958 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . Under section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (2005), the defendant’s ability to pay must be determined . . .

PETERSON, v. THERMA BUILDERS, INC. d b a, 958 So. 2d 977 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . es-topped from denying her liability to Ther-ma Builders in the civil action by operation of section 775.089 . . . s finding that Peterson was liable to Therma Builders in the civil action was predicated on section 775.089 . . . Under section 775.089(8), a defendant who is convicted in a criminal proceeding for the conduct that . . . Thus, by operation of section 775.089(8), Peterson was estopped in this civil action from denying that . . . the issue of liability in a civil theft action is properly decided by summary judgment when section 775.089 . . .

A. M. v. STATE, 958 So. 2d 461 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . Section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2004), requires that a court order a defendant to pay restitution . . .

In AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA RULES OF JUVENILE PROCEDURE, 951 So. 2d 804 (Fla. 2007)

. . . the victim pursuant to sections 985.201(4)(c-)985.0301(5)(i), 98538⅛⅛½£⅝ 985.231(l)(a)9985.437, and 775.089 . . .

CONNOR, v. STATE, 944 So. 2d 488 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . I will conclude by noting that the preamble to section 775.089, Florida Statutes, states, “[T]he criminal . . . To protect the rights of crime victims, the Legislature enacted section 775.089 to make payment of restitution . . .

G. C. v. STATE, 944 So. 2d 1099 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . When established by a preponderance of the evidence, § 775.089(7), Fla. . . . directly or indirectly by the defendant’s offense” and “related to the defendant’s criminal episode,” § 775.089 . . . See § 775.089(l)(b)(2) (“A plea agreement may contain provisions that order restitution relating to criminal . . .

J. SMITH, v. STATE, 941 So. 2d 479 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . Pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2005), a defendant shall be ordered to make restitution . . . In a case such as this one, where the defendant’s crime resulted in the victim’s death, section 775.089 . . . Pursuant to section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (2005), when there is a dispute as to the amount of . . .

MAURER, v. STATE, 939 So. 2d 234 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . protect the rights of the innocent crime victim by proper application of the provisions of section 775.089 . . . ’s criminal episode, unless it finds clear and compelling reasons not to order such restitution.” § 775.089 . . . For example, in 1984 when the Legislature amended section 775.089 to include the provisions at issue, . . . In 1992, the Legislature amended section 775.089 slightly, and in the bill amending the statute specifically . . . This analysis led the court to conclude that the main purpose of section 775.089 is to guarantee that . . .

JOHNSON, v. STATE, 942 So. 2d 415 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . Section 775.089(7), Florida Statutes (2004), in pertinent part provides: Any dispute as to the proper . . . motion, Johnson argued only that the State failed to comply with the statutory hearing requirement. § 775.089 . . .

R. A. B. v. STATE, 932 So. 2d 1227 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . and was not required to bear a significant relationship to the convicted offense pursuant to section 775.089 . . . record does not establish that restitution was a condition of R.A.B.’s plea agreement, and section 775.089 . . . Pursuant to section 775.089(l)(b)(2), Florida Statutes (2005), "A plea agreement may contain provisions . . .

KOILE, v. STATE, 934 So. 2d 1226 (Fla. 2006)

. . . on the following questions, which the court certified to be of great public importance: DOES SECTION 775.089 . . . DOES SECTION 775.089, FLORIDA STATUTES (2003), AUTHORIZE A RESTITUTION AWARD FOR THE ESTATE OF A MURDER . . . Section 775.089 states in pertinent part: (1)(a) In addition to any punishment, the court shall order . . . See § 775.089(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2003) (defining the term “victim”). . . . Reimburse the victim for income lost by the victim as a result of the offense. § 775.089, Fla. . . . This is consistent with the way section 775.089 has always been applied in our courts. . . . Section 775.089(1)(c) specifies that “[t]he term ‘victim’ ... includes the victim’s estate if the victim . . . as well as restitution for lost income as “next of kin” under the majority’s construction of section 775.089 . . . Instead, the Legislature’s intent should be determined from the two subsections of section 775.089 that . . . Section 775.089(6)(a) requires trial courts to consider only the victim’s loss in deciding whether to . . .

CHILDERS, v. STATE, 936 So. 2d 619 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . other decisions on the question of whether a county may be a “victim” as that term is used in section 775.089 . . .