Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 19-5304 (2026)

Restitution for crime victims — Orders to be separate — When restitution is not appropriate — Other remedies — Evidentiary hearings — Definitions.

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IClegislature.idaho.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Restitution for crime victims — Orders to be separate — When restitution is not appropriate — Other remedies — Evidentiary hearings — Definitions.

(1) As used in this chapter:

(a) "Economic loss" includes, but is not limited to, the value of property taken, destroyed, broken, or otherwise harmed, lost wages, and direct out-of-pocket losses or expenses, such as medical expenses resulting from the criminal conduct, but does not include less tangible damage such as pain and suffering, wrongful death or emotional distress.

(b) "Found guilty of any crime" shall mean a finding by a court that a defendant has committed a criminal act and shall include an entry of a plea of guilty, an order withholding judgment, suspending sentence, or entry of judgment of conviction for a misdemeanor or felony.

(d) "Property" shall be as defined in section 18-2402(8), Idaho Code.

(e) "Victim" shall mean:

(i) The directly injured victim which means a person or entity, who suffers economic loss or injury as the result of the defendant’s criminal conduct and shall also include the immediate family of a minor and the immediate family of the actual victim in homicide cases;

(ii) Any health care provider who has provided medical treatment to a directly injured victim if such treatment is for an injury resulting from the defendant’s criminal conduct, and who has not been otherwise compensated for such treatment by the directly injured victim or the immediate family of the directly injured victim;

(iii) The account established pursuant to the crime victims compensation act, chapter 10, title 72, Idaho Code, from which payment was made to or on behalf of a directly injured victim pursuant to the requirements of Idaho law as a result of the defendant’s criminal conduct;

(iv) A person or entity who suffers economic loss because such person or entity has made payments to or on behalf of a directly injured victim pursuant to a contract including, but not limited to, an insurance contract, or payments to or on behalf of a directly injured victim to pay or settle a claim or claims against such person or entity in tort or pursuant to statute and arising from the crime.

(2) Unless the court determines that an order of restitution would be inappropriate or undesirable, it shall order a defendant found guilty of any crime which results in an economic loss to the victim to make restitution to the victim. An order of restitution shall be a separate written order in addition to any other sentence the court may impose, including incarceration, and may be complete, partial, or nominal. The court may also include restitution as a term and condition of judgment of conviction; however, if a court orders restitution in the judgment of conviction and in a separate written order, a defendant shall not be required to make restitution in an amount beyond that authorized by this chapter. Restitution shall be ordered for any economic loss which the victim actually suffers. The existence of a policy of insurance covering the victim’s loss shall not absolve the defendant of the obligation to pay restitution.

(3) If the court determines that restitution is inappropriate or undesirable or if only partial or nominal restitution is ordered, it shall enter an order articulating the reasons therefor on the record.

(4) If a separate written order of restitution is issued, an order of restitution shall be for an amount certain and shall be due and owing at the time of sentencing or at the date the amount of restitution is determined, whichever is later. An order of restitution may provide for interest from the date of the economic loss or injury.

(5) The court may order the defendant to pay restitution to the victim in any case, regardless of whether the defendant is incarcerated or placed on probation. The court may order the defendant to pay all or a part of the restitution ordered to the court to be distributed by the court to the victims in a manner the court deems just.

(6) Restitution orders shall be entered by the court at the time of sentencing or such later date as deemed necessary by the court. Economic loss shall be based upon the preponderance of evidence submitted to the court by the prosecutor, defendant, victim or presentence investigator. Each party shall have the right to present such evidence as may be relevant to the issue of restitution, and the court may consider such hearsay as may be contained in the presentence report, victim impact statement or otherwise provided to the court.

(7) The court, in determining whether to order restitution and the amount of such restitution, shall consider the amount of economic loss sustained by the victim as a result of the offense, the financial resources, needs and earning ability of the defendant, and such other factors as the court deems appropriate. The immediate inability to pay restitution by a defendant shall not be, in and of itself, a reason to not order restitution.

(8) In determining restitution, where it appears that more than one (1) person is responsible for a crime that results in economic loss to a victim, and one (1) or more of the suspects or defendants are not found, apprehended, charged, convicted or ordered to pay restitution, the court may require the remaining defendant or defendants, who are convicted of or plead guilty to the crime, to be jointly and severally responsible for the entire economic loss to the victim.

(9) The court may, with the consent of the parties, order restitution to victims, and/or any other person or entity, for economic loss or injury for crimes which are not adjudicated or are not before the court.

(10) A defendant, against whom a restitution order has been entered, may, within forty-two (42) days of the entry of the order of restitution, request relief from the restitution order in accordance with the Idaho rules of civil procedure relating to relief from final orders.

(11) An order of restitution shall not preclude the victim from seeking any other legal remedy.

(12) Every presentence report shall include a full statement of economic loss suffered by the victim or victims of the defendant’s crime or crimes.

(13) If there is more than one (1) victim, the restitution order shall provide that the directly injured victim(s) be fully compensated for so much of the loss caused by the defendant’s criminal conduct which has not been paid by a third party, including persons referred to in subsection (1)(e)(ii), (iii) and (iv) of this section.

(14) When a person is found guilty of violating section 18-8007, Idaho Code, the court, in addition to any other sentence imposed, may order the person to pay to any victim an amount of money equal to the amount of that victim’s economic loss caused by the person as a result of the incident that created the duties as provided in section 18-8007, Idaho Code.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 200 cases (50 in the last 5 years), 1986–2026 · leading case: State v. Daniel Ryan Straub, 292 P.3d 273 (Idaho 2013).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Daniel Ryan Straub, 292 P.3d 273 (Idaho 2013). · cites it 58× “” The phrase “any rulings” in this context would include any ruling related to restitution, which is determined by the trial court in a separate written order.”

State v. Garcia, 462 P.3d 1125 (Idaho 2020). · cites it 28× “” I.C. § 19-5304(7). “The immediate inability to pay restitution by a defendant shall not be, in and of itself, a reason to not order restitution.”

State v. Gonzales, 171 P.3d 266 (Idaho Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 111× “” The next condition indicated that, “pursuant to Idaho Code § 19-5304 (2), under the Victim’s Rights Statute, the Court will issue a separate Order of Restitution to the victim herein, to which reference is hereby made.”

State v. Foeller, 489 P.3d 795 (Idaho 2021). · cites it 36× “She signed a plea agreement that stipulated she would pay restitution, as determined by the district court, in accordance with Idaho Code section 19-5304. On appeal, Foeller argues that the district court erred in ordering her to pay $535,952.”

State v. Richmond, 43 P.3d 794 (Idaho Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 25× “Idaho Code § 19-5304 (6) provides that economic loss shall be based upon the preponderance of evidence submitted to the court by the prosecutor, defendant, victim or presentence investigator.”

State v. Christina Rose Wisdom, 393 P.3d 576 (Idaho 2017). · cites it 24× “This appeal concerns a restitution award an Ada County District Court entered under Idaho Code section 19-5304. The award requires Christina Wisdom to pay $11,069.”

State v. Gardiner, 898 P.2d 615 (Idaho Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 76× “I.C. § 19-5304, the statute governing restitution for crime victims, states as follows: (2) Unless the court determines that an order of restitution would be inappropriate or undesirable, it shall order a defendant found guilty of any crime which results in an economic loss to…”

State v. Smith, 169 P.3d 275 (Idaho Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 38× “Idaho Code §§ 19-5304 (c), 18-2402(11), which define value for restitution as "market value," beg the question, "Which market?" Where the victim is a retail merchant, there are at least two potentially relevant marketsthe retail market in which the victim resells goods and the…”

State v. Cheeney, 160 P.3d 451 (Idaho Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 46× “Cheeney disputes the district court’s ruling and the state’s argument on appeal that the bank and the insurance company’s collection agency were also authorized to receive restitution.”

State v. Jensen, 241 P.3d 1 (Idaho Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 42× “” Alternatively, Jensen argues that the district court exceeded its authority, under Idaho Code § 19-5304 (6), to order restitution at sentencing or at “such later date as deemed necessary by the court,” as that period of time had expired, citing State v.”

State v. Jacob M. Torrez, 320 P.3d 1277 (Idaho Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 50× “An order of restitution shall be a separate written order in addition to any other sentence the court may impose, including incarceration, and may be complete, partial, or nominal.”

State v. Christopher T. Weaver, 345 P.3d 226 (Idaho Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 34× “any other investigative or prosecution expenses actually incurred, including regular salaries of employees____A conviction for the purposes of this section means that the person has pled guilty or has been found guilty, not *170 withstanding the form of the judgment(s) or…”

Show all 200 citing cases →

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(1) — 6 cases

State v. Hernandez, 822 P.2d 1011 (Idaho Ct. App. 1991).

State v. Daniel Ryan Straub, 292 P.3d 273 (Idaho 2013). “” The phrase “any rulings” in this context would include any ruling related to restitution, which is determined by the trial court in a separate written order.”

State v. Gardiner, 898 P.2d 615 (Idaho Ct. App. 1995). “I.C. § 19-5304, the statute governing restitution for crime victims, states as follows: (2) Unless the court determines that an order of restitution would be inappropriate or undesirable, it shall order a defendant found guilty of any crime which results in an economic loss to…”

State v. Waidelich, 97 P.3d 489 (Idaho Ct. App. 2004).

State v. Johnson, 233 P.3d 190 (Idaho Ct. App. 2010).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(1)(a) — 39 cases

State v. Foeller, 489 P.3d 795 (Idaho 2021). “She signed a plea agreement that stipulated she would pay restitution, as determined by the district court, in accordance with Idaho Code section 19-5304. On appeal, Foeller argues that the district court erred in ordering her to pay $535,952.”

State v. Parker, 139 P.3d 767 (Idaho Ct. App. 2006).

State v. Smith, 169 P.3d 275 (Idaho Ct. App. 2007). “Idaho Code §§ 19-5304 (c), 18-2402(11), which define value for restitution as "market value," beg the question, "Which market?" Where the victim is a retail merchant, there are at least two potentially relevant marketsthe retail market in which the victim resells goods and the…”

State v. Donald Leonard Houser, 314 P.3d 203 (Idaho Ct. App. 2013).

State v. Christina Rose Wisdom, 393 P.3d 576 (Idaho 2017). “This appeal concerns a restitution award an Ada County District Court entered under Idaho Code section 19-5304. The award requires Christina Wisdom to pay $11,069.”

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(1)(a)(2) — 1 case

State v. Lombard, 242 P.3d 189 (Idaho Ct. App. 2010).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(1)(b) — 1 case

State v. Adams, 521 P.3d 735 (Idaho 2022).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(1)(c) — 6 cases

State v. Dempsey, 490 P.3d 19 (Idaho 2021).

State v. Dempsey (Idaho 2021).

State v. Cody Michael Phelps (Idaho Ct. App. 2017).

State v. Best (Idaho Ct. App. 2020).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(1)(e) — 14 cases

State v. Cheeney, 160 P.3d 451 (Idaho Ct. App. 2007). “Cheeney disputes the district court’s ruling and the state’s argument on appeal that the bank and the insurance company’s collection agency were also authorized to receive restitution.”

State v. McKeeth, 38 P.3d 1275 (Idaho Ct. App. 2001).

State v. Jerry Allan Hill, 296 P.3d 412 (Idaho Ct. App. 2012).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(1)(e)(i) — 18 cases

State v. Jacob M. Torrez, 320 P.3d 1277 (Idaho Ct. App. 2014). “An order of restitution shall be a separate written order in addition to any other sentence the court may impose, including incarceration, and may be complete, partial, or nominal.”

State v. Donald Leonard Houser, 314 P.3d 203 (Idaho Ct. App. 2013).

State v. Brandon Eddins, 330 P.3d 391 (Idaho Ct. App. 2014).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(1)(e)(iv) — 8 cases

State v. Richmond, 43 P.3d 794 (Idaho Ct. App. 2002). “Idaho Code § 19-5304 (6) provides that economic loss shall be based upon the preponderance of evidence submitted to the court by the prosecutor, defendant, victim or presentence investigator.”

State v. Fullbright (Idaho Ct. App. 2024).

State v. Sean Daniel Carnell (Idaho Ct. App. 2016).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(10) — 9 cases

State v. Jensen, 241 P.3d 1 (Idaho Ct. App. 2010). “” Alternatively, Jensen argues that the district court exceeded its authority, under Idaho Code § 19-5304 (6), to order restitution at sentencing or at “such later date as deemed necessary by the court,” as that period of time had expired, citing State v.”

State v. Wade Lamonte Peterson, 280 P.3d 184 (Idaho Ct. App. 2012).

State v. Christopher T. Weaver, 345 P.3d 226 (Idaho Ct. App. 2014). “any other investigative or prosecution expenses actually incurred, including regular salaries of employees____A conviction for the purposes of this section means that the person has pled guilty or has been found guilty, not *170 withstanding the form of the judgment(s) or…”

State v. Ferguson, 67 P.3d 1271 (Idaho Ct. App. 2002).

State v. Bybee, 768 P.2d 804 (Idaho Ct. App. 1989).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(11) — 1 case

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(2) — 102 cases

State v. Gonzales, 171 P.3d 266 (Idaho Ct. App. 2007). “” The next condition indicated that, “pursuant to Idaho Code § 19-5304 (2), under the Victim’s Rights Statute, the Court will issue a separate Order of Restitution to the victim herein, to which reference is hereby made.”

State v. Johnson, 470 P.3d 1263 (Idaho Ct. App. 2020).

State v. McKeeth, 38 P.3d 1275 (Idaho Ct. App. 2001).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(3) — 1 case

State v. Matthews, 434 P.3d 209 (Idaho 2019).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(4) — 3 cases

State v. Jerry Allan Hill, 296 P.3d 412 (Idaho Ct. App. 2012).

Kenneth M. Workman v. Christopher Rich, 403 P.3d 1200 (Idaho Ct. App. 2017).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(5) — 3 cases

State of Idaho v. Catherine Elizabeth Hernandez (Idaho Ct. App. 2026).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(6) — 76 cases

State v. Cunningham, 435 P.3d 539 (Idaho 2019).

State v. Andrew C. Keys, 369 P.3d 313 (Idaho Ct. App. 2016).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(7) — 121 cases

State v. Garcia, 462 P.3d 1125 (Idaho 2020). “” I.C. § 19-5304(7). “The immediate inability to pay restitution by a defendant shall not be, in and of itself, a reason to not order restitution.”

State v. Thomas Campbell Kelley, 390 P.3d 412 (Idaho 2017).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(8) — 2 cases

State v. Head (Idaho Ct. App. 2023).

State v. Johnston, 846 P.2d 224 (Idaho Ct. App. 1993).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(9) — 16 cases

State v. Aubert, 811 P.2d 44 (Idaho Ct. App. 1991).

State v. Shafer, 161 P.3d 689 (Idaho Ct. App. 2007).

State v. Kristi L. Hurles, 349 P.3d 423 (Idaho 2015).

State v. Raymond Stuart Nienburg, 283 P.3d 808 (Idaho Ct. App. 2012).

State v. Schultz, 231 P.3d 529 (Idaho Ct. App. 2008).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(a) — 1 case

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(e)(i) — 3 cases

State v. Guerrero, 940 P.2d 419 (Idaho Ct. App. 1997).

State v. Wilson, 538 P.3d 1058 (Idaho Ct. App. 2023).

State v. Robert M. Ruiz (Idaho Ct. App. 2010).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(l) — 1 case

State v. Corbus, 249 P.3d 398 (Idaho 2011).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(l)(a) — 23 cases

State v. Olpin, 93 P.3d 708 (Idaho Ct. App. 2004).

State v. Doe, 192 P.3d 1101 (Idaho Ct. App. 2008).

State v. Cameron David Harer, 369 P.3d 316 (Idaho Ct. App. 2016).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(l)(b) — 1 case

State v. Aubert, 811 P.2d 44 (Idaho Ct. App. 1991).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(l)(c) — 3 cases

State v. Bybee, 768 P.2d 804 (Idaho Ct. App. 1989).

State v. Johnson, 233 P.3d 190 (Idaho Ct. App. 2010).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(l)(e) — 8 cases

State v. Wersland, 873 P.2d 144 (Idaho 1994).

State v. Shafer, 161 P.3d 689 (Idaho Ct. App. 2007).

State v. Matteson, 851 P.2d 336 (Idaho 1993).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(l)(e)(i) — 5 cases

State v. Raymond Stuart Nienburg, 283 P.3d 808 (Idaho Ct. App. 2012).

State v. Doe, 103 P.3d 967 (Idaho Ct. App. 2004).

State v. Kenny Carl Struhs, 346 P.3d 279 (Idaho 2015).

State v. Shepherd Reale, 343 P.3d 49 (Idaho Ct. App. 2014).

— Idaho Code § 19-5304(l)(e)(iv) — 2 cases

State v. Brittany M. Acuna, 294 P.3d 1151 (Idaho Ct. App. 2013).

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.