The General Assembly recognizes that many innocent persons suffer injury, death, property damage, and resultant financial hardship because of crimes committed in this state and that there is a genuine need in this state to establish a method whereby the responsible offender, as far as practicable, may be required to make restitution to his or her victim so as to make that victim whole with respect to the financial injury suffered.
The express purpose of restitution is to make the victim whole with respect to the financial injury suffered. In re Sutherland, 161 B.R. 657 (Bankr. E.D. Ark. 1993).
Where defendant was convicted for failing to pay child support for six years, § 5-1-109(b)(2) did not limit the restitution order to three years because so limiting the restitution would have violated the policy of this section, which was to make victims whole. Hampton v. State, 357 Ark. 473, 183 S.W.3d 148 (2004).
Restitution Amount Improper.
Trial court's restitution order that included items on it for which defendant had not been charged was improper as the purpose of restitution was to make the victim whole with respect to the financial injury suffered as a result of the victim's crime and there was no proof that many of the items included were the result of this crime. Simmons v. State, 90 Ark. App. 273, 205 S.W.3d 194 (2005).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1989–2025 · leading case: Nix v. State, 925 S.W.2d 802 (Ark. Ct. App. 1996).
Nix v. State, 925 S.W.2d 802 (Ark. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 8דSee Ark.Code Ann. §§ 16-90-301 to -306 (1987).”
Simmons v. State, 205 S.W.3d 194 (Ark. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2דA defendant who pleads guilty or no contest may be ordered to pay restitution. Ark. Code Ann. § 5-4-205 (Supp.”
Hampton v. State, 183 S.W.3d 148 (Ark. 2004). “Arkansas Code Annotated § 16-90-301 (1987) provides: The General Assembly recognizes that many innocent persons suffer injury, death, property damage, and resultant financial hardship because of crimes committed in this state and that there is a genuine need in this state to…”
In re Sutherland, 161 B.R. 657 (Bankr. E.D. Ark. 1993). · cites it 2ד” Ark. Code Ann. § 16-90-301 . The fact that the statutorily created bond company was required to reimburse the immediate victim does not obviate the economic loss to the state.”
Irvin v. State, 771 S.W.2d 26 (Ark. Ct. App. 1989). “Arkansas Statutes Annotated Sections 16-90-301 to -305 (1987) establish that the state’s purpose in the passage of the restitution statute is to provide a means of making restitution to the victim.”
Tiffany Dawn Rogers v. State of Arkansas, 2025 Ark. App. 192, 709 S.W.3d 59. · cites it 2דArk. Code Ann. § 16-90-301 (Repl. 2016). The sentencing authority is required to determine the amount of actual economic loss caused to a victim by the offense.”
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.