[tncup77]

Good day to all. Here is my question and I hope I can receive some insight.

In 2006 I pleaded to 3 counts of theft in Ohio and received a 4 year sentence. In November of 2006 I received a Judicial Release and was placed on Community Control until November 6 2011. I was ordered to pay restitution in full (234,000) by November 6 2010. At my judicial release hearing no set amount was ordered it just needed to be paid in full. Needless to say I'm far away from that but have been paying every month 100.00. I have just been violated because the sum is not paid in full. My probation officer said he would give me a good report because I have not been any trouble what's so ever. Just failure to pay off the amount above. I don't make a lot of money and struggle to make my monthly payments. Will they send be back for a unpaid debt?

[Fr_Chuck]

This one is still undecided in courts, in general yes they can, and yes they do in some courts. There is an larger case I hope that is heading for the Supreme Court down the road, but it is not there yet.

You need the best attorney you can get before the hearing.

[adthern]

Fr Chuck is right, this is a situation of, they can , but likely won't. It is better to get another $1100 out of you than nothing.

[excon]

I don't make a lot of money and struggle to make my monthly payments. Will they send be back for a unpaid debt?

Hello tn:

Well, of course, they shouldn't. Clearly, it would be unconstitutional. A law that purports to deal with a defendant fairly, but in the final analysis is truly draconian, is against the Sixth Amendments' prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment... That's how I would argue it in front of the Supreme Court - but they didn't ask me.

The Padre is right... There is a case in Georgia that we know about, and there are others, where the court ruled that IF a defendant, in good faith, did his best to pay, but is UNABLE to do so, he can't be violated. Your judicial district isn't obligated to follow that ruling, but it WOULD be instructive for the court to be made aware of the issue.

I'd discuss this with your PO. If you get an inkling that they MIGHT send you back, I'd start getting aggressive about my defense. I might respond to the PO thusly; "Wouldn't you rather I put any extra money I have into paying restitution instead of paying a lawyer?? That argument might be tooooo rational for a bureaucrat, but you can't just lay down.

excon

[tncup77]

Thanks everyone for your answers so far. I don't plan on lying down you see where that got me my first go around. Here is a bit on information I just found out today as god as my witness. I hired a criminal attorney to defend me against the original charges of theft. I took his advice and pleaded to 3 counts of theft because I thought at that time that was the best I was going to receive. I just found out my criminal attorney that I hired also sat on the city council in which the crime was committed. The kicker is he never told me he was an active councilman for that city... shouldn't he have recused himself from the case? Jesus man it feels like I received the short end of the stick.. no way out.

[excon]

shouldn't he have recused himself from the case? Jesus man it feels like I received the short end of the stick.. no way out.

Hello again, tn:

Yeah... I had Maximum Jack Tanner. He should have recused himself because he was an a$$hole... But, it doesn't work that way.

I don't know if you got screwed. It looks like you did a FEW MONTHS for stealing a LOT of money. That doesn't sound like the short end of the stick to me... I don't know who you ripped off - some government agency perhaps?? But, SOMEBODY is out some money because of you... And, they apparently, aren't going to get paid back.

So, while I support your fight against the corrupt system, playing the victim card for a couple months in the slam, doesn't impress me.

excon

[Fr_Chuck]

No many attorneys are on the city counsel or may even be on other boards. Unless your theft was from the city or he was an employee of the people who you stole from.

Being on the city council has nothing to do with your case