Background
Rory Alexander Hunt appealed from proceedings in Miami-Dade County Court. The opinion identifies the lower-court judge as Marcus Bach Armas.
The appeal concerned a restitution ruling. Hunt also raised a claim that the trial court’s conduct deprived him of due process.
The Court’s Holding
The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed. It cited Florida’s restitution statute, which requires restitution unless clear and compelling reasons counsel otherwise, and permits reliable hearsay in determining the amount or type of restitution.
The court found no fundamental error and no deprivation of due process on the record presented. It also concluded that, where a plea agreement leaves restitution to the trial court’s discretion, reversal is unwarranted absent a clear showing of abuse of discretion.
Although affirming, the court cautioned the trial court to maintain both impartiality and the appearance of impartiality. A judge may question witnesses to clarify issues or ascertain the truth, but may not become an advocate or appear to depart from neutrality.
Key Takeaways
- Restitution is generally mandatory under Florida law absent clear and compelling reasons not to impose it.
- Reliable hearsay may be considered in fixing restitution.
- Judicial questioning is permissible, but the judge must remain neutral in fact and appearance.
Why It Matters
The decision reinforces the deferential review of restitution amounts left to the trial court under a plea agreement. It also preserves a practical warning: even when judicial questioning does not amount to fundamental error, courts must avoid conduct suggesting advocacy or partiality.