State v. Schultz, 56 P.3d 974 (Utah Ct. App. 2002)

Cases | State v. Schultz, 56 P.3d 974 (Utah Ct. App. 2002) | 2018

The defendant was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment, after which he was released on parole. The Utah Board of Pardons and Parole (the Board) conditioned his parole on payment of restitution. The defendant agreed to the special condition, but paid nothing. His parole was suspended The Board calculated and approved a restitution figure of $3,798.43, which the sentencing court entered as a civil judgment. The victim applied to have the defendant’s wages garnished after he failed to pay restitution. On appeal, the defendant argued that the Board’s original restitution order was invalid because it did not have jurisdiction to issue the order because the Board had terminated his sentence and parole before it issued the order. The court of appeals held that “the Board cannot enforce parole conditions after the termination of a defendant’s sentence and parole supervision” and, therefore, the Board did not have jurisdiction over the defendant at the time it forwarded the order to the sentencing court to be entered as a civil judgment. The trial court’s denial of the defendant’s motion to set aside the civil judgment to enforce the restitution was reversed.