Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 419C.450 (2026)

Restitution

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

419C.450 Restitution. (1)(a) It is the policy of the State of Oregon to encourage and promote the payment of restitution and other obligations by adjudicated youths as well as by adult offenders. In any case within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court pursuant to ORS 419C.005 in which the adjudicated youth caused another person any physical, emotional or psychological injury or any loss of or damage to property, the victim has the right to receive prompt restitution. The district attorney shall investigate and present to the court, prior to or at the time of adjudication, evidence of the nature and amount of the injury, loss or damage. If the court finds from the evidence presented that a victim suffered injury, loss or damage, in addition to any other sanction it may impose, the court shall:

(A) Include in the judgment a requirement that the adjudicated youth pay the victim restitution in a specific amount that equals the full amount of the victim’s injury, loss or damage as determined by the court; or

(B) Include in the judgment a requirement that the adjudicated youth pay the victim restitution, and that the specific amount of restitution will be established by a supplemental judgment based upon a determination made by the court within 90 days of entry of the judgment. In the supplemental judgment, the court shall establish a specific amount of restitution that equals the full amount of the victim’s injury, loss or damage as determined by the court. The court may extend the time within which the determination and supplemental judgment may be completed for good cause. The lien, priority of the lien and ability to enforce a specific amount of restitution established under this subparagraph by a supplemental judgment relates back to the date of the original judgment that is supplemented.

(b) After the district attorney makes a presentation described in paragraph (a) of this subsection, if the court is unable to find from the evidence presented that a victim suffered injury, loss or damage, the court shall make a finding on the record to that effect.

(c) No finding made by the court or failure of the court to make a finding under this subsection limits or impairs the rights of a person injured to sue and recover damages in a civil action under subsection (2) of this section.

(d) The court may order restitution, including but not limited to counseling and treatment expenses, for emotional or psychological injury under this section only:

(A) When the act that brought the adjudicated youth within the jurisdiction of the court would constitute aggravated murder, murder or a sex crime if committed by an adult; and

(B) For an injury suffered by the victim or a member of the victim’s family who observed the act.

(e) If the adjudicated youth will be present at a hearing under this subsection and the victim requests notice, the district attorney or juvenile department shall notify the victim of the hearing.

(2) Restitution for injury inflicted upon a person by the adjudicated youth, for property taken, damaged or destroyed by the adjudicated youth and for a reward offered by the victim or an organization authorized by the victim and paid for information leading to the apprehension of the adjudicated youth, shall be required as a condition of probation. Restitution does not limit or impair the right of a victim to sue in a civil action for damages suffered, nor shall the fact of consultation by the victim be admissible in such civil action to prove consent or agreement by the victim. However, the court shall credit any restitution paid by the adjudicated youth to a victim against any judgment in favor of the victim in such civil action. Before setting the amount of such restitution, the court shall notify the person upon whom the injury was inflicted or the owner of the property taken, damaged or destroyed and give such person an opportunity to be heard on the issue of restitution.

(3)(a) If a judgment or supplemental judgment described in subsection (1) of this section includes restitution, a court may delay the enforcement of the monetary sanctions, including restitution, only if the adjudicated youth alleges and establishes to the satisfaction of the court the adjudicated youth’s inability to pay the judgment in full at the time the judgment is entered. If the court finds that the adjudicated youth is unable to pay, the court may establish or allow an appropriate supervising authority to establish a payment schedule. The supervising authority shall be authorized to modify any payment schedule established under this section. In establishing a payment schedule, the court or the supervising authority shall take into consideration:

(A) The availability to the adjudicated youth of paid employment during such time as the adjudicated youth may be committed to a youth correction facility;

(B) The financial resources of the adjudicated youth and the burden that payment of restitution will impose, with due regard to the other obligations of the adjudicated youth;

(C) The present and future ability of the adjudicated youth to pay restitution on an installment basis or on other conditions to be fixed by the court; and

(D) The rehabilitative effect on the adjudicated youth of the payment of restitution and the method of payment.

(b) As used in this subsection, “supervising authority” means any state or local agency that is authorized to supervise the adjudicated youth.

(4) Notwithstanding ORS 419C.501 and 419C.504, when the court has ordered an adjudicated youth to pay restitution, as provided in this section, the judgment shall be entered in the register or docket of the court in the manner provided by ORS chapter 18 and enforced in the manner provided by ORS 18.252 to 18.993. The judgment is in favor of the state and may be enforced only by the state. Notwithstanding ORS 419A.255, a judgment for restitution entered under this subsection is a public record. Judgments entered under this subsection are subject to ORS 18.048.

(5) A person required to pay restitution under subsection (1) of this section may file a motion supported by an affidavit for satisfaction of the judgment or supplemental judgment requiring payment of restitution in the circuit court of the county in which the original judgment was entered if:

(a) At least 50 percent of the monetary obligation is satisfied or at least 10 years have passed since the original judgment was entered;

(b) The person has substantially complied with all established payment plans;

(c) The person has not been found to be within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court under ORS 419C.005 or convicted of an offense since the date the original judgment of restitution was entered; and

(d) The person has satisfactorily completed any required period of probation or parole for the act for which the judgment of restitution was entered.

(6) When a person files a motion described in subsection (5) of this section, the district attorney for the county in which the motion was filed shall promptly notify the victim for whose benefit the judgment of restitution was entered that the person has filed the motion and that the victim may object in writing to the motion through the district attorney.

(7) If the victim does not object to the motion as provided in subsection (6) of this section, the court shall hold a hearing on the motion and may enter an order granting a full or partial satisfaction if the allegations in the affidavit supporting the motion are true and failure to grant the motion would result in an injustice. In determining whether an injustice would result, the court shall take into account:

(a) The financial resources of the defendant and the burden that continued payment of restitution will impose, with due regard to the other obligations of the defendant;

(b) The ability of the defendant to continue paying restitution on an installment basis or under other conditions to be fixed by the court; and

(8) A person may file a motion under subsection (5) of this section no more than one time per year for each judgment of restitution entered against the person. [1993 c.33 §230; 1993 c.405 §1; 1995 c.422 §83; 1997 c.313 §32; 1997 c.727 §11; 2001 c.202 §1; 2003 c.576 §214; 2003 c.670 §4; 2007 c.425 §2; 2007 c.609 §22; 2021 c.489 §72]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 33 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1996–2026 · leading case: State v. M. A. S., 462 P.3d 284 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. M. A. S., 462 P.3d 284 (Or. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 24× “The juvenile court awarded restitution, and youth argues that, because the state presented its restitution evidence after the court had determined that youth was within its jurisdiction, the state failed to meet the requirement under ORS 419C.450 that restitution evidence be…”

State v. L. G. S.-S., 475 P.3d 922 (Or. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 13× “Held: The court erred in award- ing restitution to Safeco Insurance, because the state did not meet the timing requirement in the juvenile restitution statute, ORS 419C.450, which requires the state to present restitution evidence “prior to or at the time of adjudication.”

State v. N. R. L., 311 P.3d 510 (Or. 2013). · cites it 33× “Youth argues that he is entitled to a jury trial because recent constitutional and statutory amendments have transformed the juvenile restitution statute, ORS 419C.450, into a civil device through which victims of crime can recover monetary damages for their injuries.”

State v. N. R. L., 277 P.3d 564 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 16× “Youth contends that the amendments to the restitution statute, ORS 419C.450, changed the statute’s purpose from penal to “quasi-civil,” which therefore requires compliance with Article I, section 17.”

State v. J. M. E., 451 P.3d 1018 (Or. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “]” Although ORS 419C.450 does not define “resti- tution,” ORS 419A.”

State v. R. D. M., 544 P.3d 425 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 9× “, 302 Or App at 705 , we determined that “adjudication is a determination of jurisdiction over a youth 1 ORS 419C.450 was amended in 2021. See Or Laws 2021, ch 489, § 72.”

State v. O. A. M. A., 350 Or. App. 493 (Or. Ct. App. 2026). · cites it 14× “For the reasons explained below, we conclude that it is not obvi- ous or beyond reasonable dispute that the state’s presenta- tion of evidence was untimely, and consequently, that the juvenile court did not plainly err.”

State v. J. R., 507 P.3d 778 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 2× “This court previously construed the term “adjudication” as used in ORS 419C.450, which requires a district attorney to present any restitution evidence “prior to or at the time of adjudication.”

State v. Ramos, 340 P.3d 703 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “, 249 Or App 321, 332 , 277 P3d 564 (2012), aff'd, 354 Or 222 , 311 P3d 510 (2013) (holding that youth in juvenile delinquency proceeding was not entitled to a jury trial on the issue of restitution under ORS 419C.450); State v. Hval, 174 Or App 164, 181 , 25 P3d 958 , rev den,…”

State Ex Rel. Juv. Dep't v. Rial, 46 P.3d 217 (Or. Ct. App. 2002). “290, requirements for visitation by and consultation with a juvenile counselor or other suitable counselor, requirements to make restitution under ORS 419C.450, requirements of a period of detention under ORS 419C.”

State Ex Rel. Juv. Dept. v. Nicholls, 87 P.3d 680 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). “As conditions of probation, the juvenile court may, among other things, restrict the youth's access to family and friends, restrict the youth's occupation and activities generally, and direct with whom the youth may live.”

State v. G. L. D., 290 P.3d 852 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “We held that, for purposes of juvenile restitution in ORS 419C.450(l)(a), the legislature, by incorporating the definition of “restitution” under the Criminal Code, also incorporated the definition of “victim” under the Criminal Code in ORS 137.”

Show all 33 citing cases →

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419C.450(1) — 5 cases

State v. M. A. S., 462 P.3d 284 (Or. Ct. App. 2020). “The juvenile court awarded restitution, and youth argues that, because the state presented its restitution evidence after the court had determined that youth was within its jurisdiction, the state failed to meet the requirement under ORS 419C.450 that restitution evidence be…”

State v. O. A. M. A., 350 Or. App. 493 (Or. Ct. App. 2026). “For the reasons explained below, we conclude that it is not obvi- ous or beyond reasonable dispute that the state’s presenta- tion of evidence was untimely, and consequently, that the juvenile court did not plainly err.”

State v. A. P., 344 Or. App. 116 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).

State ex rel. Juv. Dep't v. Z. D. B., 242 P.3d 714 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).

In Re Zdb, 242 P.3d 714 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419C.450(1)(A) — 2 cases

State v. N. R. L., 311 P.3d 510 (Or. 2013). “Youth argues that he is entitled to a jury trial because recent constitutional and statutory amendments have transformed the juvenile restitution statute, ORS 419C.450, into a civil device through which victims of crime can recover monetary damages for their injuries.”

State v. N. R. L. (Or. 2013).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419C.450(1)(a) — 16 cases

State v. R. D. M., 544 P.3d 425 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). “, 302 Or App at 705 , we determined that “adjudication is a determination of jurisdiction over a youth 1 ORS 419C.450 was amended in 2021. See Or Laws 2021, ch 489, § 72.”

State v. J. M. E., 451 P.3d 1018 (Or. Ct. App. 2019). “]” Although ORS 419C.450 does not define “resti- tution,” ORS 419A.”

State v. J. R., 507 P.3d 778 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “This court previously construed the term “adjudication” as used in ORS 419C.450, which requires a district attorney to present any restitution evidence “prior to or at the time of adjudication.”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419C.450(1)(a)(A) — 4 cases

State v. N. R. L., 277 P.3d 564 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). “Youth contends that the amendments to the restitution statute, ORS 419C.450, changed the statute’s purpose from penal to “quasi-civil,” which therefore requires compliance with Article I, section 17.”

State v. C. A. S., 239 P.3d 283 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).