State v. Ferre, 2014 MT 96

Ferre was charged in 1993 with multiple felonies including assault, intimidation, and drug possession, and pled guilty to the felonies on November 24, 1993.
He was ordered to pay restitution to the victim and the uninsured portion of detox treatment at St. Patrick’s Hospital.
In 1994, after a revocation of his suspended sentence for violating conditions, Ferre received new judgments including restitution obligations; the court did not address restitution in the revocation judgment.
Ferre discharged his prison sentence in 2001, but continued to owe restitution; the district court later held restitution remains a civil judgment until fully paid.
From 2013, the Department of Corrections garnished Ferre’s prison wages to satisfy the restitution in Cause No. 10893 while he was incarcerated in Cause No. 02-95.
Ferre moved to compel DOC to stop garnishing, arguing the restitution obligation had terminated when his 10893 sentence ended, but the district court denied the motion and the Montana Supreme Court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Did the district court abuse discretion denying the motion to compel?	State argues restitution did not extinguish and garnishment was lawful.	Ferre contends restitution terminated upon discharge of 10893 sentence; garnishment improper.	No abuse; restitution remains until fully paid.

State v. Brown, 182 P.3d 75 (Mont. 2008) (restitution obligations survive discharge of prison terms; civil nature of restitution)
State v. Oie, 174 P.3d 937 (Mont. 2007) (unpublished opinions not to be cited as precedent)
State v. Little, 861 P.2d 154 (Mont. 1993) (procedural requirements for pro se litigants; respect for rules)