State v. Burgette
2014 Ohio 3483
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Dustin Burgette pleaded guilty to grand theft and theft; the court imposed an aggregate 3.5-year prison term and ordered $12,428.16 restitution. Defense told the court Burgette had limited ability to pay and received SSI due to mental illness and borderline intellectual functioning.
- After ~6 months in prison Burgette moved for judicial release; the trial court granted release, suspended the sentence, and placed him on five years community control with a condition to complete restitution within four years.
- Burgette made small monthly payments (reported $10/month) from SSI through a payee and testified he paid what he could and intended to increase payments when possible.
- The state filed a violation notice for failure to complete restitution within four years. At revocation hearings the court found Burgette failed to show sufficient "good faith" effort to pay and terminated judicial release, reimposing the suspended prison sentence.
- On appeal Burgette argued the revocation violated equal protection (Bearden principles) and due process by relying on an undefined "good faith" standard and failing to inquire into his inability to pay.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether revoking judicial release for failure to pay restitution violated equal protection under Bearden v. Georgia | State: Court may revoke community control for failure to pay restitution and found lack of "good faith" effort by Burgette | Burgette: Revocation unconstitutional because record lacks evidence he was able to pay or willfully refused; SSI and limited payments show inability and bona fide effort | Reversed. Court failed to inquire into reasons for nonpayment, ability to pay, and alternatives as required by Bearden; remand for evidentiary hearing |
| Whether revocation violated due process by using undefined "good faith" standard | State: Court permissibly evaluated effort to pay as part of revocation analysis | Burgette: Vagueness and lack of inquiry into efforts deprived him of due process | Moot (court did not decide after resolving equal protection claim); not addressed on merits |
Key Cases Cited
- Bearden v. Georgia, 461 U.S. 660 (1983) (federal rule: before imprisoning for nonpayment court must determine if failure to pay was willful or if alternatives suffice)
- State v. Dockery, 187 Ohio App.3d 798 (2010) (reversal/remand where trial court failed to apply Bearden inquiry before revoking probation for nonpayment)
- Paton v. Paton, 91 Ohio St.3d 94 (2001) (describing SSI purpose as assuring a minimal income for disabled persons)