State of Tennessee v. Donnie Lomax - Concurring/Dissenting

Case Number
M2003-01443-CCA-R3-CD

I concur in the named victims’ receiving restitution. However, I seriously question whether a person or entity situated as AFC was in this case could be viewed as a “victim” for restitution purposes. The persons buying the vehicles are the named victims–and victims in fact–relative to the theft offenses charged in the indictment. The defendant took their money. AFC, with the titles, could have repossessed the vehicles. However, it voluntarily chose to relinquish the titles to the named victims, thereby essentially removing their loss from their purchases.

Authoring Judge
Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Originating Judge
Judge Allen W. Wallace
Case Name
State of Tennessee v. Donnie Lomax - Concurring/Dissenting
Date Filed
Dissent or Concur
This is a dissenting opinion
Download PDF Version