Criminal Justice Policy Program at Harvard Law School
50-State Criminal Justice Debt Reform Builder Bringing transparency to areas of significant legal complexity.
50-State Criminal Justice Debt Reform Builder Bringing transparency to areas of significant legal complexity.
Attorney General Opinions
Keyword search across all of the laws in the states. Subject-area tabs above allow you to narrow results. Click the advanced search for further refinement.
Every law can be saved to the Reform Builder
When does this apply
Below are the attorney general opinions that meet your search criteria.
12 Results
| State | Citation | Description/Statute Name | Question | Brief answer | Language from the opinion | When does the case apply? | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Michigan | Mich. Op. Att'y Gen. (1998) Opinion No. 6995 | Michigan-Attorney General opinion | Other applicable opinions |
A prosecutor is not authorized by law to require a criminal defendant to pay costs as a condition for reducing or dismissing criminal charges pending against the defendant. A court + See moremay, however, when sentencing a convicted defendant, impose such costs as are permitted by statute, including those permissible costs agreed to between the prosecutor and the defendant as part of a plea bargain.
|
Criminal prosecutions are governed by the Michigan Code of Criminal Procedure (Code), 1927 PA 175, MCL 760.1 et seq; MSA 28.841 et seq. The Code, at Chapter XI, MCL 771.1 + See moreet seq; MSA 28.1131 et seq, authorizes the imposition of costs in criminal cases. If a defendant has been found guilty, and if it appears to the satisfaction of the court that the defendant is an appropriate candidate, the court may place the defendant on probation. Section 1. As a condition of probation, the court may require the defendant to pay costs. Section 3(2)(c). Such costs, however, are limited to expenses specifically incurred in prosecuting the defendant, in providing legal assistance to the defendant, and in providing probation supervision of the defendant. Section 3(4).
|
Fines and fees |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Michigan | Mich. Op. Att'y Gen. (2008) Opinion No. 7217 | Michigan-Attorney General opinion | The use of funds from criminal fines and assessments are restricted by provisions of the Michigan State Constitution. |
However, the Legislature should be aware of the limitations imposed by Const 1963, art 8, § 9, which requires that fines assessed for any breach of the penal laws be + See moreused to support libraries. If excess revenue in the Crime Victim's Rights Fund is used for purposes other than to enforce and pay for the crime victim rights enumerated in art 1, § 24, the use could face scrutiny to determine if the assessments conflict with art 8, § 9 or other constitutional provisions. . . . Therefore, to the extent that the Legislature intends to authorize uses of the Fund to pay for the constitutionally enumerated crime victim's rights, it must consider whether each proposed use is within the language of art 1, § 24, given the principles of constitutional construction that guide the Court.
|
Fines and fees | |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Ohio | 1990 Ohio Op. Atty. Gen. No. 90-088 (Nov. 14 1990) | Fines and fees | Does allowing different municipalities to set their own indigency standards or fines/fees violate the equal protection afforded by the state’s constitution? | Indigency should be determined on a case-by-case basis, not through set standards |
A gleaning of the aforementioned authorities clearly reveals that there are no set criteria for determining whether an individual is indigent. Rather, the preferred approach is to determine indigency on + See morea case by case basis so as to accord attention to any and all factors tending to indicate an individual's financial condition. . . . [T]he the criteria for determining . . . whether an individual is indigent, include the ready availability of real or personal property owned; employment benefits; pensions; annuities; social security; unemployment compensation; inheritances; number and age of dependents; outstanding debts, obligations and liabilities; and any other relevant considerations concerning the financial condition of an individual.
|
Revenue flow |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Ohio | no | fines and fees | Which fines and/or fees may be collected by a private vendor? |
Neither the courts nor the State AG has considered this question. However, the Ohio Revised Code provides that both misdemeanor fines, § 2928.18(F) and felony fines, § 2928.28(G)(1), may be + See morecollected by private vendors
|
Transparency | |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Ohio | no | ability to pay | Who has the burden of proof in an ability to pay determination? What is the standard of proof required? | See Case Law: Liming v. Damos, 979 N.E.2d 297 (Ohio 2012) | Fines and fees | |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Ohio | no | Ohio-Attorney General opinion | Should ability to pay be considered when imposing fines or fees or only when collecting fines or fees? | See Case Law: State v. Meyer, 706 N.E.2d 378, 380 (1997); Ohio Rev. Code § 2947.14 | ability to pay | Fines and fees |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Ohio | 2012 Ohio Op. Att'y Gen. No. 2012-039 (Nov. 14, 2012) | fines and fees | What authority do county or municipal courts have to set fines or fees? | County courts can use their fining power to fund various projects, programs, and services of the court |
Although a county court has authority to use a special projects fund established under R.C. 1907.24(B)(1) to finance community service programs, nothing in the Ohio Constitution, Revised Code, Ohio Rules + See moreof Criminal Procedure, or Rules of Superintendence for the Courts of Ohio directs the manner in which a county court may use moneys in a special projects fund to provide such financing. This means that the judges of a county court have the discretion and implied power to use special projects fund moneys in whatever manner is reasonably necessary to make community service programs available to persons who are convicted of, or plead guilty to, a misdemeanor.
|
Fines and fees |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Ohio | no | Fines and fees | What authority does the state supreme court have to impose binding state-wide rules on the imposition or collection of fees and fines? |
This has not been considered by courts or the State AG. But the Ohio Supreme Court issues "bench cards" guiding the lower courts on how to implement fines. See, e.g., + See moreThe Supreme Court of Ohio, Office of Judicial Services, Collection of Fines and Court Costs (2014)
|
Revenue flow | |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Ohio | no | no | Under what circumstances does a conflict of interest in the imposition or enforcement of court debt violate state law? | This has not been considered to date | ||
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Utah | Normal G. Angus, Informal Opinion No. 87-06, 1987 WL 272559, at *2-3 (July 15, 1987) | Informal Opinion No. 87-06 |
Are the same procedural protections that are required in criminal proceedings required in civil collection/contempt proceedings arising from criminal justice debt when those proceedings may result in incarceration? What if + See morethe proceedings may only result in additional fines or non-incarceration penalties?
|
Unclear. Bail forfeiture proceedings do not provide the same safeguards. I am unsure if this can be extrapolated to collection proceedings. |
Bail forfeiture actions are civil in nature; criminal procedure safeguards are not implicated
.In comparing the two approaches to nonappearancebail forfeiture versus contemptit becomes readily apparent that the contempt process presents + See morefewer obstacles of statutory construction and would be procedurally easier to effectuate.
|
Enforcement |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Utah | Ms. Faye Price, Informal Opinion No. 79-51, 1979 WL 32606, at *1 (Feb. 15, 1979) | Informal Opinion No. 79-51, | Does allowing different municipalities to set their own indigence standards or fines/fees violate the equal protection afforded by the states constitution? |
Possibly. Ability to pay should be consistently applied in reference to statute that requires parents and guardians to pay for the cost and maintenance of State Training School residents. Therefore, + See moreit is possible that determining ability to pay when assessing criminal justice debt presents same constitutional issues.
|
there could be constitutional difficulties arise from the manner in which it is applied if great care is not taken to insure that the determination of financial responsibility is made + See moreon a strictly consistent and rational basis.
|
Ability to pay |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Utah | Ronald W. Thompson, Informal Opinion No. 77-150, 1978 WL 25972, at *1 (Feb. 7, 1978) | Informal Opinion No. 77-150 | see above | see above |
There is no requirement in the statute that there be a judicial determination of indigence, and it does not appear that a county could properly limit its payments to persons + See morewho have been judicially determined indigent.
|
Ability to pay |