## Facts

- John and Dana Capels’ home was burglarized in January 1981, and various jewelry was stolen, including three custom USAC national-championship rings and Mrs. Capels’s wedding band.
- Julio Campins, Jr. operated two precious-metals businesses that purchased jewelry for resale or scrap.
- Shortly after the burglary, Mrs. Capels contacted Campins while searching for the stolen items; she testified Campins admitted buying some jewelry from the burglar and said he had already melted it down, returning only a sterling silver ring.
- The melted items included the three championship rings and the wedding band; Campins refused to make restitution.
- The Capelses sought civil recovery under Indiana Code 34-4-30-1, alleging their pecuniary loss resulted from conduct constituting criminal mischief.
- At trial, John Capels described the rings as custom and not ordinarily traded; he testified to replacement-related costs and valued each ring in a range, settling on $750 per ring, and explained their personal significance.
- The wedding band had a recent appraisal of $700.
- The trial court found Campins purchased and destroyed stolen jewelry under circumstances indicating he knew or should have known it was stolen, constituting criminal mischief, and awarded treble damages plus attorney’s fees.
- The trial court valued the rings at $1,000 each and used the $700 appraisal for the wedding band, resulting in a trebled damages award of $11,100.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence supported civil liability under Indiana Code 34-4-30-1 by proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Campins’s conduct constituted criminal mischief.
2. Whether the damages award was excessive, particularly the valuation used for trebling.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals affirmed the liability determination that Campins’s conduct constituted criminal mischief and triggered the civil treble-damages statute.
- The court held the evidence permitted an inference that Campins acted at least recklessly in destroying property he knew or should have known was stolen, including in light of his role as a professional dealer and his rapid melting of the items.
- The court approved using a valuation method that accounts for actual value to the owner when property is unique and lacks a normal market.
- The court modified the judgment by reducing the damages to better match the evidentiary record supporting specific values.
- The court remanded for a hearing to determine reasonable attorney’s fees incurred on appeal.

## Legal Principles

- Indiana Code 34-4-30-1 authorizes a civil action for up to three times actual damages, plus costs and reasonable attorney’s fees, when a plaintiff suffers pecuniary loss from a violation of enumerated property offenses, including criminal mischief.
- A defendant may be civilly liable under the statute without a criminal conviction if the plaintiff proves the underlying criminal offense by a preponderance of the evidence.
- For unique personal property with little or no ordinary market, factfinders may consider owner testimony, replacement cost, and other evidence of actual value to the owner; personal significance may inform valuation, but damages must remain grounded in evidence and not rest on sentiment alone.
- A precious-metals dealer’s purchase and rapid destruction of suspiciously sourced items can support a finding of reckless or knowing conduct sufficient for criminal mischief, especially when regulatory noncompliance facilitates the loss.
- Statutory authorization of attorney’s fees under the treble-damages scheme may extend to fees incurred on appeal, requiring remand for calculation.

## Conclusion

The appellate court upheld treble-damages liability because the dealer’s purchase and immediate melting of stolen jewelry supported a finding of criminal mischief proven by a preponderance of the evidence, but it reduced the valuations used to compute treble damages and remanded to determine appellate attorney’s fees.


Campins v. Capels, 461 N.E.2d 712 (Ind. Ct. App. 1984)