In our lawyers thread MH put this statute in a link. I read that statute and it is very very interesting. I suggest reading it, although it is not an easy read and it is very long.
I don't have any problem with restitution for lying, or other crimes, in this case or others.
What I think the precedent that may be set here is that, any state will be able to tack a lying charge on with any other charges (be they drugs, murder, fraud, kidnap) and providing they obtain a conviction on the lying charge, the defendant even though they may be innocent of all charges aside from lying, they will have to pay for the states entire investigation. Why might someone lie initially, i.e. cheating on wife or husband, embarrassment, afraid of police, etc, and none of these reasons may have to do with the charge of drugs that they ended up not being convicted of, yet if the state proved they lied initially, the state could then charge them with investigating them for the drugs that they were not guilty of. There are many other scenarios that have nothing to do with murder, or the most hated woman in America, or bad verdicts, that could be affected in the future based on what HHBP rules on this.
As always, my entire post is my opinion only.