Opinion ID: 1892522
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Confession or Entry of Judgment as Restitution

Text: Scholten's last argument, that error lay in requiring him, as a condition of suspended sentence, to confess a judgment for the entire amount of victim's medical bills, dental bills and out-of-pocket expenses from this incident (quoted from his Judgment and Sentence, signed June 10, 1988), is also a reprise of one considered in State v. Gillespie, 445 N.W.2d 661, handed down August 30, 1989. On this issue, as in Gillespie, we reverse. Essentially, this condition sidestepped and undercut the comprehensive restitution scheme constructed by the state legislature in SDCL chs. 22-6, 23A-27, and 23A-28, interpreted in State v. Wolff, 438 N.W.2d 199 (S.D.1989), to contain essential due process protection. We note that restitution in conjunction with suspended sentence is directly addressed in SDCL 23A-28-3. Further, any victim of a criminal defendant dissatisfied with court-ordered restitution has, as his exclusive remedy, a civil action against such defendant under SDCL 23A-28-6. There is under our current restitution scheme, a statutory boundary between civil judgment and criminal restitution which has been crossed in this case. In view of the above analysis, we also reverse the trial court's imposition of a condition for suspended sentence which provided [t]hat the defendant enter a judgment for 1/3 of the medical and dental expenses and loss of wages to the victim. (quoted from Scholten's Judgment and Sentence). Unlike Gillespie, wherein the defendant was directed to pay 1/3 restitution, the entire restitutional aspect of Scholten's sentence was contrary to our statutes and must be reconsidered on remand. In summary, we reverse and remand only on the sentencing issue regarding entry or confession of judgment as a means of making restitution. The trial court is to resentence Scholten in accordance with this opinion and the criminal restitution statutes. Scholten's conviction, however, is affirmed. Affirmed in part, reversed and remanded in part. WUEST, C.J., and MORGAN and MILLER, JJ., concur. SABERS, J., concurs specially.