State v. Unis

The 90-day timeline established by Oregon's criminal restitution statute may be extended for good cause.

Defendant plead guilty to first-degree theft and attempted first-degree theft. The judgment of conviction was entered on December 15, 2008, and the court indicated that restitution would be imposed. On February 3, 2009, the court entered a restitution judgment for the amount of $851.15. On February 13, 2009, the defendant requested a hearing concerning the restitution judgment. The hearing was scheduled for April 13, 2009, but was postponed until May 1, 2009, by request of defendant's counsel. Then on May 1, 2009, the prosecution requested the hearing to be postponed so that the parties could reach an agreement regarding the amount of the restitution, to which the defendant did not object. On July 21, 2009, the prosecution filed an amended restitution judgment seeking an increased amount, due to the receipt of additional information on damages to the victim of the defendant's crime. The court scheduled another hearing on August 24, 2009, due to request by the defendant's counsel. The hearing was finally held on August 31, 2009, at which time the court determined that the increased amount was correct. The Court of Appeals held that there was good cause for the extension of the 90-day period for restitution determination as the majority of the delays were due to requests from the defendant's counsel, and the delay in obtaining the correct amount of restitution due was not caused by prosecutorial neglect. Affirmed.