Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes
Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 137.107 (2026)

Authority of court to amend part of judgment relating to restitution

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      137.107 Authority of court to amend part of judgment relating to restitution. At any time after entry of a judgment upon conviction of a crime, the court may amend that part of the judgment relating to restitution if, in the original judgment, the court included language imposing, recommending or requiring restitution but failed to conform the judgment to the requirements of ORS 18.048 or any other law governing the form of judgments in effect before January 1, 2004. [1997 c.526 §2; 2003 c.576 §163]

 

      Note: 137.107 was enacted into law by the Legislative Assembly but was not added to or made a part of ORS chapter 137 or any series therein by legislative action. See Preface to Oregon Revised Statutes for further explanation.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1993–2023 · leading case: Stancliff & Stancliff, 513 P.3d 20 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Stancliff & Stancliff, 513 P.3d 20 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “Rather, father contends, the court focused primarily on factor (f) related to the court’s assessment of father’s willingness and ability to facilitate a meaningful relationship between mother and the children, to the exclusion of other factors that would serve the father and the…”
Gilbride v. Smith, 537 P.3d 961 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). “” Father’s attor- ney further stated that a “qualified professional evaluator can provide all of that information—as well as a thorough evaluation of the statutory custody factors [under ORS 137.107]—to the court” in a “comprehensive custody eval- uation,” which would be “the…”
State v. Carrillo, 865 P.2d 379 (Or. Ct. App. 1993). “ORS 137.107; ORS 137.103(2); State v. Barkley, supra, 315 Or at 438 ; State v.”
Gilbride v. Smith (Or. Ct. App. 2023). “” Father’s attor- ney further stated that a “qualified professional evaluator can provide all of that information—as well as a thorough evaluation of the statutory custody factors [under ORS 137.107]—to the court” in a “comprehensive custody eval- uation,” which would be “the…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 137.107(1) — 1 case
Stancliff & Stancliff, 513 P.3d 20 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “Rather, father contends, the court focused primarily on factor (f) related to the court’s assessment of father’s willingness and ability to facilitate a meaningful relationship between mother and the children, to the exclusion of other factors that would serve the father and the…”
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.