Practice Area: Juvenile Defense and Appeals
Court: Indiana Supreme Court
Case: B.K. and S.K. v. State of Indiana, Case No. 23S-JV-344
Attorney: Audrey Lunsford
Result: Reversed and Remanded

The Situation

Attorney Audrey Lunsford represented two juveniles who were ordered to pay $28,750 in restitution. The juvenile court made them jointly responsible for the entire amount and attempted to enforce the restitution order as a civil-judgment lien against their property.

The court ordered B.K., then a high-school senior earning approximately $160 per week, to pay $250 each month. S.K., who was only 15 years old and earned approximately $20 per game working occasionally as a referee, was ordered to pay $125 each month.

The civil liens could have followed the juveniles into adulthood, affecting their credit, education, employment opportunities, property, and ability to build financially stable futures.

Our Strategy

Attorney Lunsford challenged the juvenile court's authority to convert the restitution orders into enforceable civil judgments. She argued that Indiana's juvenile restitution statute—unlike the restitution statute governing adult criminal cases—does not authorize a juvenile court to impose a civil-judgment lien.

After the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed the juvenile court, Attorney Lunsford continued the fight by petitioning the Indiana Supreme Court to accept the case. The Supreme Court granted transfer, heard oral argument, and considered whether Indiana law permitted juvenile restitution to be enforced as a civil judgment.

The Result

The Indiana Supreme Court agreed with Attorney Lunsford.

In a published opinion issued on June 18, 2024, the Court held that the juvenile court lacked statutory authority to enforce the restitution orders as civil judgments. The Supreme Court reversed the lower court and remanded the case for reconsideration of restitution.

The Court explained that Indiana's juvenile restitution statute contains no provision authorizing a judgment lien. It also emphasized that imposing a substantial civil judgment on a young person could interfere with education, employment, financial aid, and rehabilitation long after the juvenile case ended.

The decision established important Indiana law: juvenile courts cannot impose powers or penalties that the Indiana General Assembly did not authorize. Read the Indiana Supreme Court's opinion.

Why This Case Matters

Juvenile justice is intended to promote accountability while providing children with care, protection, treatment, and rehabilitation. An unlawful civil judgment can burden a young person well into adulthood and undermine those rehabilitative goals.

Attorney Audrey Lunsford's persistence did more than secure a victory for her clients. Her work established precedent protecting juveniles throughout Indiana from restitution orders being improperly converted into civil-judgment liens.

This Indiana Supreme Court victory demonstrates the importance of experienced appellate advocacy—and the difference one determined attorney can make in the development of Indiana law.