A BILL for an Act to create and enact a new subdivision to subsection 4 of section 12.1-32-07, a new subsection to section 12.1-32-08, and a new section to chapter 39-08 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to restitution for the child of a victim of criminal vehicular homicide and conditions of probation; to amend and reenact subsection 5 of section 12.1-32-06.1 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to the extension of probation; to provide a penalty; and to provide for application.
HB 1558 would create a new form of restitution called “parental loss restitution” for cases of criminal vehicular homicide when the deceased victim was the parent or legal guardian of a minor child. In those cases, a court could order the defendant to make monthly payments to each child until age 18, with the amount determined by factors such as the child’s needs, the surviving caregiver’s resources, custody arrangements, child care costs, and any related insurance or civil recoveries. The bill also allows the court to impose this restitution at sentencing or within 60 days, requires a hearing unless waived, and permits the surviving parent or guardian to file a claim affidavit supporting the request.
The bill also amends probation provisions so that, for criminal vehicular homicide, a court may extend probation with an additional period of unsupervised probation for as long as support responsibility continues. It further provides that if the offender is incarcerated and cannot pay immediately, payments must begin within one year after release and continue until any arrearage is paid. Unpaid restitution may be reduced to a civil judgment, and the bill states that parental loss restitution cannot be used to reduce a later civil damages award arising from the same incident. The measure applies only to criminal vehicular homicide charges filed on or after its effective date.
The bill’s impact would be to add a new restitution remedy in North Dakota criminal law and to expand sentencing and probation options in vehicular homicide cases. It would affect section 39-08-01.2 and related sentencing and probation statutes in chapters 12.1-32 and 39-08 of the Century Code, creating a structured mechanism for compensating children who lose a parent or guardian in a criminal vehicular homicide.
Overall sentiment appears mixed but initially favorable in the House, where the bill passed second reading overwhelmingly, 84-8. It then failed in the Senate on second reading by a wide margin, 3-43, indicating substantial opposition or lack of support in that chamber. No committee transcript was provided, so the available record shows strong early House support but decisive Senate rejection.
The main point of contention appears to be whether criminal sentencing should include this type of ongoing, child-focused restitution and how it would interact with civil remedies and enforcement after incarceration. Supporters likely viewed the bill as a way to provide financial help to children harmed by a parent’s death, while opponents may have questioned the fairness, administrability, or overlap with civil litigation and existing restitution law. The bill also raises practical issues about calculating payment amounts, enforcing long-term obligations, and handling cases where the offender is unable to pay while incarcerated.
HB 1558 would amend North Dakota’s sentencing, probation, and criminal vehicular homicide statutes to authorize parental loss restitution as part of a criminal sentence. It would create a new restitution framework in chapter 39-08, allow courts to order monthly payments to minor children of a deceased parent or guardian, extend probation in certain cases, and permit unpaid restitution to be docketed as a civil judgment. It would also limit later civil proceedings by preventing parental loss restitution from being considered when awarding civil damages for the same incident.
The bill received strong support in the House, passing second reading 84-8, suggesting broad agreement with the goal of helping children who lose a parent in a criminal vehicular homicide. However, the Senate rejected it overwhelmingly on second reading, 3-43, showing that the measure did not command similar support in the upper chamber. With no committee testimony available, the voting record is the clearest indicator: favorable in the House, but ultimately unsuccessful and controversial in the Senate.
The likely points of contention were the creation of a new, long-term restitution obligation tied to criminal sentencing, the administrative burden of determining and enforcing monthly payments, and the interaction between restitution and civil lawsuits. Opponents may have been concerned about fairness to defendants, especially those who are incarcerated or have limited ability to pay, while supporters likely emphasized the needs of children who lost a parent or guardian. The bill’s rule that civil awards may not be reduced by parental loss restitution may also have raised concerns about double recovery or overlapping remedies.