Jerome Theodorou v. State of Alabama

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

REL 10/02/2009 Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o formal r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e R e p o r t e r o f D e c i s i o n s , Alabama A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ((334) 2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may be made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r . ALABAMA COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OCTOBER TERM, 2008-2009 CR-07-0615 Jerome T h e o d o r o u v. S t a t e o f Alabama Appeal WINDOM, Lawerence C i r c u i t (CC-05-344) Court Judge. AFFIRMED Kellum dissent, from BY U N P U B L I S H E D MEMORANDUM. and Main, J J . , concur. with opinion. Wise, P.J., and Welch,J . , CR-07-0615 W I S E , P R E S I D I N G JUDGE, I b e l i e v e the amount o f court trial restitution court due erred could appears that payments the not the operate court business caselaw regarding recover as a result ambiguous, and difficult in Therefore, I the urge the a l l of the losses the d a y s when the the equipment. $4,572.50 for had previously the amount o f a made on involving Alabama of that the law Nevertheless, Bussman C o n s t r u c t i o n type of a victim is acts property. WELCH, J u d g e , Accordingly, to clarify I do n o t Company was believe suffered to the dissenting. I write ordered the I respectfully dissent. I r e s p e c t f u l l y d i s s e n t , and dissent. is property. were a t t r i b u t a b l e t o Theodorou's c r i m i n a l a c t of r e c e i v i n g stolen may particularly stolen Court i t equipment. criminal receiving Supreme Also, some restitution defendant's caselaw governing r e s t i t u t i o n . that example, revenue f o r the awarded of the For without application cases i n i t s c a l c u l a t i o n of from Theodorou. awarded $6,616.58 i n l o s t business The dissenting. pay I j o i n P r e s i d i n g Judge Wise's s p e c i a l l y to p o i n t restitution out that Jerome Theodorou c a l c u l a t e d from 2 the date that CR-07-0615 t h e v i c t i m ' s p r o p e r t y was Theodorou charged The was with evidence not and s t o l e n i n September charged found with guilty reflected that the between the date Theodorou's 2005, have were been monetary of receipt assessed of r e c e i v i n g January damages stolen 20, 2005. incurred theft in the stolen property attributed against 3 as he was property. possession Therefore, by September to Theodorou Theodorou However, property; the of improperly of t h a t Theodorou d i d not take of the v i c t i m s p r o p e r t y u n t i l believe theft 2004. on and the I victim 2004 and January 20, should restitution. not

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.