Posted on 04/23/2005 7:28:13 AM PDT by Excuse_My_Bellicosity
Fearing a flood of criminal defendants will dodge paying restitution to their victims, state attorneys are appealing a federal bankruptcy judge's decision that absolved an arsonist of nearly $240,000 in debt.
It is the first time a Utah judge has ruled that court-ordered criminal restitution can be erased in bankruptcy court.
The March federal ruling had a ripple effect this week when a West Valley City judge relied on it to dismiss $80,000 in restitution ordered for Rebecca Mecham, a 27-year-old Kearns woman injured by a drunken driver.
State attorneys believe both decisions are wrong. They have asked U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Glen Clark to stay his March 8 ruling - which would prevent other defendants from using it while the case is appealed.
A hearing on the request is set for May 17 before Clark.
The ruling could hurt other crime victims and affect state agencies involved with restitution orders, said Assistant Attorney General Kevin Olsen, who represents the state Office of Debt Collections.
"The decision has some implications that are real troublesome," Olsen said.
Clark's ruling was made in the bankruptcy of Jason Derek Troff, 27, who was part of a foursome who burned down a West Jordan McDonald's restaurant under construction in August 1996. Protesting the slaughter of cattle, chickens and fish, the group poured gasoline in the nearly completed building and ignited it by throwing a Molotov cocktail.
Troff pleaded guilty to one count of arson in 1997. Third District Judge Tyrone Medley ordered him to spend one year in jail, perform 500 hours of community service, spend 36 months on probation -and pay $239,969 in restitution.
By October 2001, Troff had completed his probation except for paying the debt. Probation officials asked to end his supervision and have the remaining amount - $230,420 - be covered by a civil judgment to be collected by the Office of State Debt Collection.
Judge William Barrett agreed. But in February 2003, Troff filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy and argued that erased the restitution debt.
State attorneys fought back, arguing Troff should pay what he owed plus more than $50,000 in fees and interest.
Clark analyzed the debt as if it had remained a criminal restitution order.
He cited a 1999 federal appellate ruling that said restitution is only protected against a bankruptcy filing if it is both paid to the government and benefits the government.
Clark reasoned criminal restitution cannot be collected from Troff because it would benefit his crime victims - not the government.
Olsen concedes restitution restores victims' losses, but argues it also "has a purpose to punish and rehabilitate the defendant," which amounts to a benefit for the government.
Chapter 13 bankruptcy trustee and attorney Kevin Anderson notes that other areas of bankruptcy law provide an exception for drunken driving cases.
"The code clearly contemplates that claims arising from death or personal injury caused from a drunk driving action were intended to be [paid]," Anderson said.
That policy is strengthened in the new federal bankruptcy laws signed this week, which extend the protection of restitution ordered for victims of drunken boat and airplane drivers, he said.
Clark reasoned criminal restitution cannot be collected from Troff because it would benefit his crime victims - not the government.
And there you have it folks. The govt. cares ZERO/ZIP/NADA/EL-ZIPPO/ZILCH/A-BIG-GOOSE-EGG about protecting or compensating the victims. If the govt. can't collect money off it, they're not interested. There is no justice, the ACLU is probably celebrating right now.
The American peasants are worthless. Now shut up and take your beating quietly...
The word reasoned doesn't belong in that sentence. It figures ... the ink is hardly dry on GWB's signature on the bankruptcy bill and already a major amendment is necessary. Meanwhile, parole officers should consider the dismissal of restitution via bankruptcy as a parole violation. That guy should never had been allowed to end parole without completing restitution.
The tyranny of those tyrants in black robes continues, sadly.
And you are just realizing this?
"If the govt. can't collect money off it, they're not interested."
Yeah,that's pretty tremendous.
IMO restitution should NEVER be dismissed. The drunken driver might be bankrupt today, but he might win the lottery tomorrow. Nobody should be able to escape restitution by simply running up his credit cards.
UN-FRICKEN-BELIEVABULL!!!!!!
I'd have to say that this pretty much sums up exactly what is fundamentally wrong with FedGov these days. If they ain't making money off something, they just really don't give a damn.
Government has been that way for a long time, but we're getting to a point now that the politicians and judges are not even making a half-assed effort to do some right things or even make a small appearance of honesty. They'll tell you to your face to go shove it. The courts won't touch them. What are you going to do, vote them out? Force them into retirement so that they can live in a big house with their millions of dollars acquired by fair means and foul and nothing to do but hang out in a country club, play golf, and go on trips to the Bahamas 4 times a year. Wow, that's real punishment. /rant off
You must be into some serious S&M!
McDonalds needs to apply to the various victim's compensation boards. If the government sees they might have to pay for some of this loser's actions, they might do a little rethinking of the good judge's silliness.
An ACLU lawyer is the Salt lake City mayor.
You can't even imagine the convolutions of logic that go into the application of his political power.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.