Skip to main content

New case on restitution payments

Posted by attorney Troy Pickard

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 provided by the author

Author of this guide:

Was this guide helpful?

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.

Ask a Question

- or -

Search for lawyers by reviews and ratings.

Find a Lawyer