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
Below are the attorney general opinions that meet your search criteria.
|State||Citation||Description/Statute Name||Question||Brief answer||Language from the opinion||When does the case apply?|
|Louisiana||Op. Att'y Gen. No. 97-237 (June 18, 1997)||Uniform eligibility criteria for indigency standards||Does allowing different municipalities to set their own indigency standards or fines/fees violate the equal protection afforded by the state’s constitution?||Unclear, but different municipalities are required by statute to have the same standards||
(d) uniform eligibility criteria for determining indigency and the eligibility of defendants to qualify for indigent defender representation at the district and state level;(citing language from statute creating the Louisiana+ See more
|Ability to pay|
|Louisiana||Op. Att'y Gen. No. 95-449 (Nov. 8, 1995)||Collection contracts with private vendors||Which fines and/or fees may be collected by a private vendor?||no stated limit||
You have requested our opinion as to whether it is permissible for the Sheriff, with the formal approval of the District Court, to enter into such an agreement. If so,+ See more
you ask whether the public bid laws apply in procuring the services of a collection agency. We have reviewed the constitutional and statutory provisions relating to the powers and duties of sheriffs and can find nothing that would prohibit the Sheriff from entering into such an agreement. Our opinion is predicated upon the concurrence to the agreement of all parties enumerated hereinabove, and a formal order of the District Court Judge authorizing the contract and the percentage and/or fee to be retained by the collection agency. As discussed, this opinion is limited to only those fines that have been previously assessed, are currently delinquent and which you have been unable to collect. While a contract for the services of a collection agency are not required to be publicly bid by the Sheriff, we recommend that you solicit several proposals to ensure the confection of a contract that is most favorable to your office.
|Louisiana||Op. Att'y Gen. No. 83-183 (June 17, 1983)||Court's authority to impose costs||Other applicable opinions||
It is well settled that the recovery and allowance of costs in criminal prosecutions is dependent entirely on statutory provisions. Absent statutory authority, a court has no power to award+ See more
costs against a defendant on conviction. See C. J. S. Costs Section 435, 437. Op. Att'y Gen. No. 83-183 (June 17, 1983)
|Fines and fees|
|Illinois||Two opinions stating that there a prisoner must only reimburse the county for expenses incurred due to their incarceration if they have the ability to pay .||Illinois-Attorney General opinion||Who has the burden of proof in an ability to pay determination? What is the standard of proof required?||1996 WL 67870 (Ill.A.G.);1981 WL 37190 (Ill.A.G.)|
1997 Ill. Atty. Gen. Op. 027 (Ill.A.G.), 1997 WL 824988; 1984 Ill. Atty. Gen. Op. 72 (Ill.A.G.), 1984 WL 60051; 1992 WL 469747 (Ill.A.G.); 1985 Ill. Atty. Gen. Op. 126+ See more
(Ill.A.G.), 1985 WL 68980
|Illinois-Attorney General opinion||What authority do county or municipal courts have to set fines or fees?||Fines and fees|
|Illinois||1992 WL 469752 (Ill.A.G.); 1985 Ill. Atty. Gen. Op. 166 (Ill.A.G.), 1985 WL 68990; 1978 Ill. Atty. Gen. Op. 175 (Ill.A.G.), 1978 WL 17642||Illinois-Attorney General opinion||What authority does the state supreme court have to impose binding state-wide rules on the imposition or collection of fees and fines?||Revenue flow|
|Indiana||2003 Ind. Op. Att'y Gen. No. 2 (Jan. 31, 2003)||RE: Local Ordinances and State Laws||What authority do county or municipal courts have to set fines or fees?||Cities and towns may not enact local ordinances similar to state laws in order to generate revenue||
The Home Rule Act expressly prohibits local units of government from adopting local ordinances which assign a penalty for an act that constitutes a crime or infraction under state statute.+ See more
A state statute must be evaluated to determine if the statute deals comprehensively with a subject matter; local ordinances might not be preempted if a state statute does not deal comprehensively with a subject matter and there is room for supplemental local regulation. However, a city or town may not enact a local ordinance where there is an existing state statute dealing comprehensively with the subject matter and local law is considered preempted by state law.
|Indiana||2010 Ind. Op. Att'y Gen. No. 1 (May 12, 2010)||Re: Civil Forfeitures and the Common School Fund||Other applicable opinions||Civil forfeitures are not committed to the common school funds like criminal fines and fees under the state constitution||
It is our opinion that Article 8, § 2 of the state constitution does not apply to forfeiture actions brought under Ind. Code ch. 34-24-1. Article 8 of the Indiana+ See more
Constitution provides for the funding of the common school fund, part of which is derived “from the fines assessed for breaches of the penal laws of the State; and from all forfeitures which may accrue.” Art. 8, § 2. A proceeding under Indiana's forfeiture law is civil in nature, and it is only fines and forfeitures from criminal proceedings that must be paid into the common school fund.