State v. Jensen, 955 P.2d 195 (N.M. Ct. App. 1997)

Cases | State v. Jensen, 955 P.2d 195 (N.M. Ct. App. 1997) | 2018

The defendant pled guilty to embezzlement over $20,000, two counts of fraud over $20,000, fraud over $2500, unlawful practice or public accounting, and racketeering. The trial court ordered the defendant to pay restitution at 15% compound interest and to execute promissory notes payable to the victims as a condition of probation. On appeal, the defendant claimed that: (1) the concept of restitution does not create a debtor-creditor relationship; (2) execution of the notes was not reasonably related to rehabilitation; (3) the condition did not require or forbid conduct reasonably related to deterring future criminality; (4) the notes and accrued interest were not authorized by N.M. Stat. Ann. § 31-17-1; (5) the conditions of restitution extend beyond the maximum probation or parole period; and (6) requiring the signing of the notes could result in a violation of defendant’s probation if he made insufficient payment. The appellate court held that: (1) the defendant objected neither to the fact that he was financially obligated to his victims nor to the amount of the obligation. Consequently, if requiring the defendant to sign the notes was proper as a condition of probation, the defendant could not complain of the note amounts or that the notes might create a debt civilly enforceable; (2) the conditions were reasonably related to the defendant’s rehabilitation; (3) execution of promissory notes with interest serves to deter future criminality; (4) notes and interest are permitted by law; (5) the notes were not intended to be a substitute for restitution, but simply a memorialization of what the defendant admitted he owed to victims; and (6) until such time as the State may seek revocation for failure to pay restitution, the defendant’s contention regarding revocation was speculative and premature.