Legal Opinion

State v. Biscotti

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided April 16, 2008No. 040532669; A127608PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLandau, P. J.

ORS 137.106(l)(b) provides that, for “good cause,” the trial court may extend the time within which it may enter judgment requiring a defendant to pay restitution. At issue in this case is what constitutes “good cause.” The court concluded that the state’s admitted carelessness in failing to prove restitution earlier amounts to “good cause.” Defendant appeals, arguing that the state’s carelessness cannot amount to good cause for a delay. We agree with defendant, vacate the order of restitution, and otherwise affirm.

The relevant facts are undisputed. Defendant stole from her employer by using…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  2. State v. JohnsonOregon Supreme Court · 2005
  3. Joshi v. Providence Health System of Oregon Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 2006
  4. In Re Marriage of WeberOregon Supreme Court · 2004
  5. State v. ArwoodCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1980

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. State v. TippettsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010
  2. State v. BeckhamCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012
  3. State v. McLaughlinCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  4. State v. GallegosCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
  5. State v. MurrellCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API