Posted over 2 years ago. Applies to Oregon, 1 helpful vote, 1 comment

Save
Email

State v. Kacin is a recent decision from Oregon's Court of Appeals.  It holds that, as stated in ORS 137.540(9), failure to pay restitution can never be a sufficient basis to revoke probation.  This is true even when the court makes a blanket statement that "the purposes of probation are not being served."  In order to lawfully revoke probation under these circumstances, the Court of Appeals suggests that the revoking judge would have to discuss, in greater detail, the purposes of probation and which circumstances inform their opinion that the purposes of probation are not being served.

 

 

Additional Resources

State v. Kacin

Related Questions

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask a Lawyer

Get free answers from experienced attorneys.

 

Ask now

24,797 answers this week

2,568 professionals answering

Ask a Lawyer

Get answers from top-rated lawyers.

  • It's FREE
  • It's easy
  • It's anonymous

24,797 answers this week

2,568 professionals answering

Legal Dictionary

Don't speak legalese? We define thousands of terms in plain English.

Browse our legal dictionary