Cases | Bailey v. State, 74 S.W.3d 622 (Ark. 2002) | 2018
The defendant, a minor, pled guilty to residential burglary and theft of property. He was placed on probation and ordered to pay restitution in an amount to be determined within ninety days from the date of the adjudication hearing. No subsequent order by the trial court set restitution at a fixed dollar amount, but both parties agreed that the defendant was ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $500.00, which represented the victims’ insurance deductible. Thereafter, the defendant pled guilty to possession of a controlled substance, and the State revoked his probation. The State also moved to resentence the defendant and revise the restitution amount, arguing that once the petition to revoke the defendant’s probation was filed, it had the effect of reopening the original case and the trial court had the authority to impose any order that he could have originally entered. The trial court then held a restitution hearing, and entered an amended order of revocation, finding that the defendant’s failure to pay any of the restitution originally ordered was grounds enough for revoking his probation. The trial court ordered that restitution be set in the amount of $6,785.60. The defendant appealed, arguing that the trial court lacked the authority to revise the amount of restitution after the original 90-day period had elapsed. The Supreme Court of Arkansas reversed, finding that the trial court’s initial order revoking the defendant’s probation due to possession of a controlled substance constituted disposition of the matter. The trial court did not have jurisdiction to enter the subsequent order amending the amount of restitution.