A. The trial court shall retain jurisdiction of the case as follows:
1. Subject to paragraph 2 of this subsection, for purposes of ordering, modifying and enforcing the manner in which court-ordered payments are made until paid in full or until the defendant's sentence expires.
2. For all restitution orders in favor of a victim, including liens and criminal restitution orders, for purposes of ordering, modifying and enforcing the manner in which payments are made until paid in full.
B. At the time the defendant is ordered to pay restitution by the court, the court may enter a criminal restitution order in favor of each person who is entitled to restitution for the unpaid balance of any restitution order. A criminal restitution order does not affect any other monetary obligation imposed on the defendant pursuant to law.
C. At the time the defendant completes the defendant's period of probation or the defendant's sentence or the defendant absconds from probation or the defendant's sentence, the court shall enter both:
1. A criminal restitution order in favor of the state for the unpaid balance, if any, of any fines, costs, incarceration costs, fees, surcharges or assessments imposed.
2. A criminal restitution order in favor of each person entitled to restitution for the unpaid balance of any restitution ordered, if a criminal restitution order is not issued pursuant to subsection B of this section.
D. The clerk of the court shall notify each person who is entitled to restitution of the criminal restitution order.
E. A criminal restitution order may be recorded and is enforceable as any civil judgment, except that a criminal restitution order does not require renewal pursuant to section 12-1611 or 12-1612. Enforcement of a criminal restitution order by any person or by the state on behalf of any person who is entitled to restitution includes the collection of interest that accrues at a rate of ten percent a year. Enforcement of a criminal restitution order by the state includes the collection of interest that accrues at a rate of four percent a year. A criminal restitution order does not expire until paid in full. A filing fee, a recording fee or any other charge is not required for recording a criminal restitution order.
F. All monies paid pursuant to a criminal restitution order entered by the court shall be paid to the clerk of the court.
G. Monies received as a result of a criminal restitution order entered pursuant to this section shall be distributed in the following order of priority:
1. Restitution ordered that is reduced to a criminal restitution order.
2. Associated interest.
H. The interest accrued pursuant to subsection E of this section does not apply to fees imposed for collection of the court ordered payments.
I. A criminal restitution order is a criminal penalty for the purposes of a federal bankruptcy involving the defendant.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
44
cases (
5 in the last 5 years), 1989–2026 · leading case:
State v. Lewandowski, 207 P.3d 784 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).
State v. Lewandowski, 207 P.3d 784 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 24× “¶ 1 Appellant James Lewandowski appeals the trial court’s entry of a criminal restitution order, pursuant to A.R.S. § 13-805, at the time of his sentencing.”
State of Arizona v. Reuben Renee Cota, 319 P.3d 242 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 23× “2013): as to sentences imposed on or after April 1, 2013— the effective date of the 2012 amendments to A.R.S. § 13-805, 2012 Ariz. Sess. Laws, ch.”
State of Arizona v. Angelino Paolo Buccheri-Bianca, 312 P.3d 123 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 6× “The trial court imposed a combination of concurrent and consecutive sentences totaling fifty-one years’ imprisonment, and a criminal restitution order (CRO) pursuant to A.R.S. § 13-805. On appeal, Bue-cheri-Bianea challenges the sufficiency of the *327 evidence underlying his…”
State v. Unkefer, 239 P.3d 749 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 38× “We nevertheless vacate the superior court’s denial of his motion because the court did not consider whether, in light of the purpose of restitution, the legislature’s intent in enacting A.R.S. § 13-805, and the circumstances of this case, the 12-year delay was reasonable.”
State v. Pinto, 880 P.2d 1139 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 11× “”) section 13-805 allows the entry of *595 such a judgment after the expiration of the period of probation, but before the full restitution amount has actually been paid.”
State v. Moreno-Medrano, 185 P.3d 135 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 4× “He contends that AR.S. § 13-805 only permits those fees to be reduced to a criminal restitution order at the completion of a defendant’s sentence or term of probation and that the error alleged here will result in immediate accrual of interest on his obligation under § 13-805(C).”
State of Arizona v. Albert Junior Lopez, 298 P.3d 909 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 6× “Lewandowski, this court held that A.R.S. § 13-805, 1 which governs the entry of CROs, applies only at the expiration of a defendant’s sentence or probation.”
State v. Zaputil, 207 P.3d 678 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 4× “His reliance on A.R.S. § 13-805(A) (Supp.2007) is misplaced.”
State v. Zinsmeyer, 218 P.3d 1069 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 3× “See A.R.S. § 13-805. We agree with the parties that this was improper; such orders may only be entered at the completion of a defendant’s sentence.”
State of Arizona v. Manuel Jesus Pesqueira, 333 P.3d 797 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 4× “Based on amendments to § 13-805, this court has determined that Lopez does not apply in cases where the defendant is ordered to pay restitution to a victim.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-805(A) — 15 cases
State v. Lewandowski, 207 P.3d 784 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).
“¶ 1 Appellant James Lewandowski appeals the trial court’s entry of a criminal restitution order, pursuant to A.R.S. § 13-805, at the time of his sentencing.”
State v. Zaputil, 207 P.3d 678 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
“His reliance on A.R.S. § 13-805(A) (Supp.2007) is misplaced.”
State v. Zinsmeyer, 218 P.3d 1069 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).
“See A.R.S. § 13-805. We agree with the parties that this was improper; such orders may only be entered at the completion of a defendant’s sentence.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-805(A)(1) — 4 cases
State v. Zaputil, 207 P.3d 678 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
“His reliance on A.R.S. § 13-805(A) (Supp.2007) is misplaced.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-805(A)(2) — 1 case
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-805(B) — 5 cases
State of Arizona v. Reuben Renee Cota, 319 P.3d 242 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014).
“2013): as to sentences imposed on or after April 1, 2013— the effective date of the 2012 amendments to A.R.S. § 13-805, 2012 Ariz. Sess. Laws, ch.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-805(C) — 14 cases
State v. Lewandowski, 207 P.3d 784 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).
“¶ 1 Appellant James Lewandowski appeals the trial court’s entry of a criminal restitution order, pursuant to A.R.S. § 13-805, at the time of his sentencing.”
State v. Moreno-Medrano, 185 P.3d 135 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
“He contends that AR.S. § 13-805 only permits those fees to be reduced to a criminal restitution order at the completion of a defendant’s sentence or term of probation and that the error alleged here will result in immediate accrual of interest on his obligation under § 13-805(C).”
State of Arizona v. Manuel Jesus Pesqueira, 333 P.3d 797 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014).
“Based on amendments to § 13-805, this court has determined that Lopez does not apply in cases where the defendant is ordered to pay restitution to a victim.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-805(C)(1) — 1 case
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-805(E) — 4 cases
State of Arizona v. Reuben Renee Cota, 319 P.3d 242 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014).
“2013): as to sentences imposed on or after April 1, 2013— the effective date of the 2012 amendments to A.R.S. § 13-805, 2012 Ariz. Sess. Laws, ch.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.