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.
11 Results
| State | Citation | Description/Statute Name | Question | Brief answer | Language from the opinion | When does the case apply? | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Montana | 49 Mont. Op. Att'y Gen. No. 18, 2002 WL 1009805 | Montana-Attorney General opinion | What authority do county or municipal courts have to set fines or fees? |
The Montana Constitution and Montana law authorize amunicipal court judge to release a defendant on a time-pay
bail bond, defined as a bond in an amount set by the judge
to be + See morepaid in installments.
|
If the court finds some form of bail necessary, however, Mont. Code Ann. § 46-9-301, provides more specific factors for a court to consider. These factors include, among other matters + See morenot related to the safety of the victim and the community, that the amount shall be not oppressive, and that the amount shall be
considerate of the financial ability of the accused. Id., §§ 46-9-301(4) and (6). The time-pay bail bonds system comports with these requirements.The Montana Constitution and Montana law authorize a municipal court judge to release a defendant on a time-pay bail bond, defined as a bond in an amount set by the judge to be paid in installments.
|
Ability to pay |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Montana | 41 Mont. Op. Att'y Gen. No. 59 | Montana-Attorney General opinion | Other applicable opinions | Cash bail for minor offenses may be increased to include applicable surcharges |
In order to collect the additional $10 charge required by section 46-18-236, MCA, a court may exercise its power under section 46-9-302, MCA, and increase the bail schedule for minor + See moreoffenses in a like amount.
|
Enforcement |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Texas |
Tex. Att'y Gen Opinion Op. No. JM-10 (1983),"""Inability to pay fees is an affirmative defense to the failure to pay them.""",ability to pay,,transparencyShould ability to pay be considered when imposing + See morefines or fees or only when collecting fines or fees?,,,,,,fines
What authority do county or municipal courts have to set fines or fees?,Municipal courts have authority to sets fines and fees so long as they do not exceed the maximum fine or fee permitted by the relevant statute. ,Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. GA-0593 (2008)
|
court may impose . . . an increase in the defendant's fine, up to a total fine that does not exceed the maximum fine for the offense for which the + See moredefendant was sentenced
|
Who has the burden of proof in an ability to pay determination? What is the standard of proof required? | Burden of proof is on the defendant by preponderance of the evidence. But see Rusk v. State, 440 S.W.3d 694, 702 (Tex. App. 2013) | fines and fees | |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Texas |
Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. JM-176 (1984),"""Proceedings in contempt cases should proceed as near as practical to criminal cases.""",ability to pay,,enforcementDoes allowing different municipalities to set their own indigency standards or + See morefines/fees violate the equal protection afforded by the state’s constitution? ,"Possibly. In Texas, a law that fixes a greater punishment in one county than another is violative of Equal Protection, so a law allowing for different levels of protection or different penalty fines may also violate Equal Protection. ",Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. DM-123 (1992); Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. JM-1120 (1989),"""costs imposed in misdemeanor cases involving state criminal statutes must be uniform statewide . . . a law that fixes a greater punishment in one county than in other counties for the violation of a state law cannot be upheld and is in contravention of constitutional inhibitions, both State and Federal""; ""Assessment of a minimum $50 fine in every Class C misdemeanor hot check case in order to defray the cost of an additional employee would result in the penalty for a state defined crime to be different in Jim Wells County than it is in other counties and would violate both due process and equal protection constitutional rights.""",fines and fees,,ability to pay
Which fines and/or fees may be collected by a private vendor? ,Any fines or fees ordered to be paid by a court,Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. JC-0516 (2002)
|
The debts that may be collected [are] those which have been ordered to be paid by a court. |
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?
|
Contempt case require the same or as near as practicable due process protections as criminal cases. | revenue flow | |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Texas | Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. JC-0516 (2002) | "The debts that may be collected [are] those which have been ordered to be paid by a court." | Which fines and/or fees may be collected by a private vendor? | Any fines or fees ordered to be paid by a court | revenue flow | |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Texas | Tex. Att'y Gen Opinion Op. No. JM-10 (1983) | "Inability to pay fees is an affirmative defense to the failure to pay them." | Who has the burden of proof in an ability to pay determination? What is the standard of proof required? | Burden of proof is on the defendant by preponderance of the evidence. But see Rusk v. State, 440 S.W.3d 694, 702 (Tex. App. 2013) | ability to pay | |
|
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 |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Minnesota | Mr. Richard T. Jessen Minn. Op. Atty. Gen. 1025B 1981 WL 157319 | Minnesota-Attorney General opinion | Other applicable oppinions | Municipalities and towns are entitled to at least half of the funds from fines and fees collected by the county clerk |
The crucial feature in the context of this statute is that, unlike the large number of special and limited purpose government units, a municipality, or a city, is a general + See morepurpose government unit. For example, the municipality is authorized by a wide range of statutes to engage in a variety of functions, including providing police protection and protecting the public health, safety, welfare and Morals. See; Minn. Stat. chs. 410 to 472 (1980). Review of the various local government units reveals that a town is the unit most similar to a municipality. To some extent, towns also possess traditional police powers and authority to provide law enforcement services. Minn. Stat. §§ 365.15; 367.03, subd. 3 (1980). Indeed, numerous towns are given the powers and authority of a statutory city. Minn. Stat. § 368.011 (1980). We therefore conclude that while the county is entitled to one-half of all such fines or penalties, the municipality or town in which a statutory violation is committed is entitled to the other half of such funds.
|
Revenue flow |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Minnesota | Mr. D. Scott Ballou Minn. Op. Atty. Gen. 1025-B 1980 WL 119583 | Minnesota-Attorney General opinion | In most circumstances, the allocation of funds collected by fines and fees is based on the geographic location of the offense that gave rise to the fine or fee, |
The manner of disposition of fines and fees is based on the geographic location of the offense giving rise to the fee or fine and not on the law enforcement + See moreagency responsible for issuing the citation. The only exceptions provided by the statute occur when the Minnesota Highway Patrol issues the citation. See Minn. Stat. § 299D.03, subd. 5 (1978), or where the fines or fees were collected prior to August 1, 1975, see Minn. Stat. § 487.33, subd. 6 (1978). However, the fines and fees referred to in Minn. Stat. § 487.33, subd. 5 (1978) are limited to certain parking fines, which must be paid over in full each month to the municipality in which the parking violation occurred, and fines and penalties collected as a result of violations of a state statute, or ordinance, charter provision, rules or regulation of a city must be equally divided on a monthly basis.
In addition, monies collected as a result of a violation of an ordinance promulgated by a town board of supervisors or board of county commissioners shall be retained by the county treasurer pursuant to the last sentence of Minn. Stat. § 487.33, subd. 5 (1978).
|
Revenue flow |