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

5 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

Kansas Kan. Atty. Gen. Op. No. 95-101, 1995 WL 643346 Courts--District Courts--District Judges; Power and Authority; Contingency Fee Contract to Collect Court Costs, Fines, Restitution and Attorney Fees Which fines and/or fees may be collected by a private vendor? A district court does not have the inherent power to contract with a collection agency to collect unpaid court costs, fines, attorney fees, and restitution.
"[W]hile the court may use the state setoff program, it is our opinion that the court does not have the inherent power to contract with a private collection agency to
+ See more
collect these debts...Contracting with a collection agency to collect debts owed to the state, the county and crime victims is not associated with managing a court's affairs nor is it necessary to achieve an orderly and expeditious disposition of cases. Court costs and restitution are civil judgments and the state, the county and the crime victim may choose to pursue other collection alternatives which a court initiated contract may foreclose. For example, the state, through its department of administration, and the county may want to open the bidding process for collection services. As far as restitution is concerned, the idea behind it is to make the crime victim whole. State v. Hinckley, 13 Kan. App. 2d 417, 419 (1989). Laws enacted in 1995 suggest that the collection of restitution is a private right belonging to the crime victim by giving the latter the ability to file the award as a civil judgment and requiring the victim to credit any amount received from the restitution award against any subsequent civil recovery. L. 1995, ch. 257, § 9-12. Allowing the district court to pay a portion of the restitution award as a collection fee affects the victim's right to collect the entire amount and may reduce the amount a victim could recover against the convicted criminal."
Enforcement
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

Kansas Kan. Att'y Gen. Op. No. 84-25 (Mar. 20, 1984) Criminal Procedure—Costs in Criminal Cases—Liability for Costs What authority do county or municipal courts have to set fines or fees?
A district magistrate or municipal court judge may not assess a defendant for "room and board" costs associated with his or her confinement in a city or county jail, unless
+ See more
the legislature enacts a statute so providing.
 it is our opinion that there is no statutory authority whereby a district magistrate judge or municipal court judge may assess a defendant for ‘room and board’ costs associated with his or her
+ See more
confinement in a city or county jail. Although what has been said above is dispositive of the question raised, we are impelled to note that, where the legislature enacts a statute so providing, the state or a subdivision thereof may initiate proceedings against a prisoner for reimbursement of the expenses attributable to his or her incarceration. See 72 C.J.S., Prisons § 26(e); 139 A.L.R. 1028; McAuliffe v. Carlson, 377 F.Supp. 896, 900 (1974).
Fines and fees
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

Wyoming 1980 Wyo. Att'y Gen. Op. No. 80-09 (May 29, 1980) Opinion No. 80-09 (1980) What authority do county or municipal courts have to set fines or fees?
A municipality may adopt an ordinance providing for a lesser penalty than that provided for by the statutory code, which provides for mandatory jail sentence of one day for any
+ See more
person convicted of driving or being in control of a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, etc.
There are cases which hold that municipalities may not enact their own penalties; and cases which hold to the contrary. The differences between the cases appear to turn on a
+ See more
combination of factors. In arriving at these diverse results, courts have recognized the following distinctions: felonies or misdemeanors; the presence or absence of home rule; the presence or absence of express municipal authority; and the presence or absence of clear and express language indicating state preemption. For the reasons hereafter stated, we conclude that municipalities may enact their own penalties for the crime of DWUI. Although some may believe the result anomalous, we find merit in the argument that had the legislature intended to impose mandatory jail sentences on our cities and towns, it would have done so by simple, clear, and express language. Municipalities have express powers to govern themselves and to regulate local affairs. Municipalities have been granted express power to regulate the use of streets by the legislature. Clear and express limitation of the power to regulate the use of streets does not appear in the statutes; nor has the legislature clearly and expressly indicated its desire to gain exclusive jurisdiction over DWUI in W.S. 31-5-233 (1977) or in Senate Enrolled Act No. 32. The provision of a lesser penalty in a municipal ordinance does [*12] not create conflict with a state law on the same subject, provided the crimes are of a similar class. Therefore, municipalities may regulate DWUI by passing ordinances with lesser penalties than provided by Senate Enrolled Act No. 32.
Fines and fees
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

Wyoming 1985 Wyo. Att'y Gen. Op. No. 85-001 (April 19, 1985) 1985 Op. Atty Gen. Wyo. 1 Other applicable opinions The county sheriff or county may proceed against a person that is physically incarcerated for all medical bills when the person is incarcerated, regardless of the source of the injury.
In conclusion, then, the county sheriff is responsible for all medical bills incurred in the treatment of those persons who are in his custody, whether or not such persons have
+ See more
ever been physically incarcerated in the county jail and regardless of the source of the injury. The county commissioners must reimburse him for these costs. A person's indigency has no bearing upon the initial determination of responsibility. If the person is not indigent the sheriff or county may proceed against him in a suit for reimbursement. [*12] If the person is in fact indigent, the sheriff or county has no recourse for recovery against either the county hospital or the state welfare system.
Fines and fees
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

Wyoming 1987 Wyo. Att'y Gen. Op. No. 87-006 (May 28, 1987) 1987 Op. Atty Gen. Wyo. 19 After incarceration the board of parole has exclusive jurisdiction to administer the restitution imposed at sentencing by the court.
After incarceration the board of parole has exclusive jurisdiction to administer the restitution imposed at sentencing by the court. Section 7-13-424, W.S. 1977, provides the board of parole with
+ See more
a comprehensive scheme of parole restitution: the board shall provide for restitution on parole, may modify restitution imposed by the sentencing court, modify restitution imposed by the board or waive it entirely. Under § 7-13-413, W.S. 1977, the board is given the power to adopt rules and regulations governing the performance of duties of parole officers and the administration of the act. Thus it is reasonable that the probation and parole board could take on the responsibility of collecting and disbursing restitution if so ordered by the court.
Enforcement