Below are the attorney general opinions that meet your search criteria.

10 Results

Export results to Excel

State Citation Description/Statute Name Question Brief answer Language from the opinion When does the case apply?
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

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 more
a 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
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

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 more
collected by private vendors
Transparency
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

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
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

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
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

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 more
of 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
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

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 more
The Supreme Court of Ohio, Office of Judicial Services, Collection of Fines and Court Costs (2014)
Revenue flow
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

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
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

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 more
the 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 nonappearance—bail forfeiture versus contempt—it becomes readily apparent that the contempt process presents
+ See more
fewer obstacles of statutory construction and would be procedurally easier to effectuate.
Enforcement
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

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 state’s 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 more
it 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 more
on a strictly consistent and rational basis.
Ability to pay
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

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 more
who have been judicially determined indigent.
Ability to pay