Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Appeals court hears dispute over which restitution law version applies in State v. Christopher DeVore; defense says trial counsel was ineffective
Summary
The Utah Court of Appeals heard oral argument in State v. Christopher DeVore on whether the 2023 version of the Crime Victim Restitution Act governs a post‑sentencing motion for additional restitution and whether trial counsel’s failure to raise that defense amounts to ineffective assistance.
The Utah Court of Appeals heard oral argument in State of Utah v. Christopher DeVore on whether the 2023 version of the Crime Victim Restitution Act (CVRA) governs a victim’s post‑sentencing motion for additional restitution and whether trial counsel was ineffective for not raising that timeliness defense.
Appellant counsel Jessica Heidholzer told the panel that the governing event for procedural rules is the procedural act itself and argued the filing of the motion for additional restitution is the event regulated by the statute. "The event regulated here is UOVC’s motion for additional restitution," Heidholzer said, urging the court to apply Clark and related precedents and to treat timeliness as governed by the statute in effect at the time of the filing. She…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
