Tarpley (Thomas) v. State ( 2014 )

 company's letter which formed the basis for the State's restitution request
and the district court's award. While the judgment of conviction did not
expressly state who was entitled to the restitution award, the charging
document listed only one victim and, at the sentencing hearing, the
district court expressly "impose[d] restitution in the amount of $6,156.60
to be paid to the victim." (Emphasis added.) The district court also
correctly stated, "I can't order [Tarpley] to pay restitution to the insurance
company, but I can sure order him to pay restitution to the victim." See
Martinez, 115 Nev. at 12, 974 P.2d at 135 ("A defendant's obligation to pay
restitution to the victim may not, of course, be reduced because a victim is
reimbursed by insurance proceeds."). Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.
Pickering
J.
Saitta
cc: Hon. Michelle Leavitt, District Judge
Clark County Public Defender
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) I94Th
EIPM