Can someone clarify something for me here ... near the top of the appeals
court review is the following text:

DEITS, C. J.

Restitution order reversed and remanded for reconsideration; otherwise
affirmed.

DEITS, C. J.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction of three counts of
computer crime. ORS 164.377. We reverse the order of restitution, but
otherwise we affirm.

Does this mean that the restitution that Randal was told to pay no longer
needs to be paid? At least, that's how I read this. It would be cool if
it were true.

- Jeff