In Washington, restitution cannot be ordered on a Hit and Run because the damages are not a result of the crime. The crime is leaving the scene of an accident, not the act of getting into the accident. On appeal, the Prosecution argued that the same reasoning should apply to a civil compromise of a Hit and Run. Payment for damages should not be considered restituion for the crime because the damages were not the result of any crime. In making this argument the prosecution urged the court to overturn prior precedent which specifically allowed for civl compromise of a Hit and Run.

The court of appeals agreed with the trial court and upheld the dismissal. Thus, civil compromise remains a great tool in resolving Hit and Run and many other crimes by taking discretion out of the prosecutor’s hands and placing it with the victim.