Puckett v. Bruce, 73 P.3d 736 (Kan. 2003)

Cases | Puckett v. Bruce, 73 P.3d 736 (Kan. 2003) | 2018

Inmate pled guilty to aggravated escape from custody and was ordered to pay restitution to the Department of Corrections (DOC). The defendant filed a habeas corpus proceeding seeking to prevent collection of restitution while incarcerated. The district court held that the DOC could collect restitution while the defendant was incarcerated but that inmate could retain $10 per month of monies earned in his inmate account. The DOC appealed, contending that the district court had no authority to exempt $10 per month. Inmate cross-appealed, challenging the court’s authority to collect restitution during his incarceration. The supreme court held that: (1) the plain and unambiguous language of Kan. Stat. Ann. § 21-4603d permitted the court to combine incarceration and repayment of the costs and expenses incurred in the defendant’s apprehension; (2) the district court was within its discretion to exclude $10 per month from collection. If the district court was vested with discretion regarding repayment, it was vested with discretion to determine whether a certain amount should be withheld from collection; and (3) the order entered was within the court’s discretion and the DOC did not demonstrate an abuse of discretion.