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.
23 Results
State | Citation | Description/Statute Name | Question | Brief answer | Language from the opinion | When does the case apply? | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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
|
Alabama | Ala. Att'y Gen. Op. 2003-086 | Alabama-Attorney General opinion |
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?
|
An indigent defendant facing contempt proceedings where he is sentenced to a term of imprisonment, which is suspended, is entitled to the appointment of counsel pursuant to Alabama v. Shelton. |
Under Alabama v. Shelton, 122 S. Ct. 1764, 1767 (2002), a defendant is entitled to counsel if he: (1) is indigent; (2) has not waived the right to coun¬sel; + See moreand (3) is given a suspended sentence that may “end up in the actual depri¬vation of [his] liberty[.]” Based on the scenario you have presented, if the con¬temnor is indigent and, as it appears, he was not advised of and did not waive the right to counsel, he was entitled to an attorney at the time he pleaded guilty to the contempt charges. Consequently, he cannot be incarcerated on the con¬tempt charges. Under Shelton, appointment of counsel for indigent defendants is a con-stitutional prerequisite to the imposition of a conditional or suspended term of imprisonment. Although the contempt proceeding is considered “quasi-criminal” in nature and characterized as a “violation,” rather than a “crime” [see Ivey v. State, 698 So. 2d 179, 184 n.2 (Ala. Crim. App. 1995), aff’d, 698 So. 2d 187 (Ala. 1997)], because the defendant faces the possibility of incarceration [see ALA. CODE §13A-5-7 (1994) (stating that a defendant faces a term of imprisonment for both misdemeanors and violations)], he is entitled to counsel. See Lassiter v. Dep’t of Soc. Serv., 452 U.S. 18, 25 (1981) (recognition of right to appointed counsel in a civil proceeding “where the litigant may lose his physical liberty if he loses the litigation”); see also Opinion to Rex K. Rainer, Director, Department of Finance, dated July 23, 1982, A.G. No. 82-00465; Ridgway v. Baker, 720 F.2d 1409, 1413 (5th Cir. 1983).
|
Enforcement |
Add to Dashboard
|
Alabama | Ala. Att'y Gen. Op. 2002-036 | Alabama-Attorney General opinion |
The United States Supreme Court and the Supreme Court of Alabama have set forth minimal due process procedures to be afforded to a probationer in a probation revocation hearing.
In a + See moreprobation revocation hearing, the probationer must be given written notice of the claimed violations of probation, a written statement by the factfinder as to the evidence relied on, and the reasons for revoking his probation.
Because review of probation revocation proceedings from district or municipal court is in the nature of certiorari, no appeal bonds would be set.
The right to counsel in probation revocation proceedings is not absolute.
The judge conducting the probation hearing should decide on a case-by-case basis whether due process requires that an indigent probationer be represented by counsel.
|
the Supreme Court of Alabama has set forth the requirements and guidelines that must be met for minimal due process to be accorded the probationer under Morrissey and Gagnon before + See morehis pro¬bation can be revoked. These guidelines include:
1. Written notice to the probationer of the claimed violations of probation.
2. Disclosure to the probationer of evidence against him or her.
3. Opportunity of probationer to be heard in per-son and to present witnesses and documentary evidence.
4. The right to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses (unless the judge specifically finds good cause for not allowing confrontation).
5. A written statement by the judge as to the evi-dence relied on and reasons for revoking proba-tion.
6. The trial judge who granted probation may also conduct the revocation hearing. (We are not convinced that a detached and neutral judge should hold a revocation hearing. Judges preside over retrials. There appears to be no sound rea-son why the judge who granted probation could not fairly and impartially preside over revocation of probation hearing.)
7. We see no valid reason for having two hear¬ings if the probationer has been given sufficient notice of the charges and the evidence to be relied on for revocation of probation. If the pro¬bationer has not had time to prepare to refute the charges and evidence against him, he can have a timely continuance. 8. The judge conducting the probation hearing should decide on a case by case basis whether due process requires that an indigent probationer be represented by counsel.
9. It is not to be understood that proof beyond a reasonable doubt or the preponderance of the evidence are the standards to be applied in determining whether the probation should be revoked. The trial judge must only be reasonably satisfied from the evidence that the probationer has violated the conditions of his probation. Fiorella v. State, 40 Ala.App. 587, 121 So.2d 875 (1960).
Armstrong v. State, 294 Ala. 100, 102-03, 312 So. 2d 620, 622-23 (Ala. 1975) (footnote omitted).
|
Enforcement | |
Add to Dashboard
|
Alabama | Ala. Att'y Gen. Op. 1998-00043 | Alabama-Attorney General opinion | What authority do county or municipal courts have to set fines or fees? |
A municipality may enter into a contract with a pri¬vate probation service to fulfill the needs of the munic¬ipal court. Furthermore, a municipal judge can assess a supervision fee upon + See moreeach probationer as a condition of probation. This fee, however, cannot exceed the proba¬tioner's ability to pay.
|
Court costs are prescribed by statute and cannot be extended. See Attorney General's Opinion to Honorable Steven E. Blair, dated August 11, 1995, A.G. No. 95-00283.
The municipal probation + See morestatute, however, gives the judge broad authority to place conditions on probation. ALA. CODE _ 12-14-13 (1995). The statute not only pro¬vides a listing of conditions that the judge may require the probationer to comply with, but also gives the judge the authority to require the probationer to comply with "any other conditions." Id. Therefore, it is the opinion of this Office that a municipal judge can assess a super¬vision fee upon each probationer as a condition of probation.
Any condition placed on a probationer that requires the payment of a fee, fine, or restitution should not exceed the probationer's ability to pay. See ALA. R. CRIM.
P. 27.1, Committee Comments.
|
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Alabama | Ala. Att'y Gen. Op. 2012-027 | Alabama-Attorney General opinion | Other applicable opinions | Non-indigent defendants may be incarcerated for failure to pay a fine after serving his or her sentence for the underlying offense |
Subject to the limitations of Rule 26.11 of the Alabama Rules of Criminal Procedure, the court may place a nonindigent defendant in jail for failure to pay a fine after + See morethe defendant has completed his or her sentence or probation for the underlying offense. The defendant may serve time until the fine is paid or no longer than one day for each $15 of the fine, no longer than the maximum term of imprisonment for the offense, and no longer than one year if the offense is a felony.
|
Enforcement |
Add to Dashboard
|
Alabama | Ala. Att'y Gen. Op. 2002-336 | Alabama-Attorney General opinion | Other applicable opinions | A municpality may publish, in a newspaper of local circulation, the names of those individuals with outstanding warrants for unpaid fines and the amount of those fines. |
This Office has previously opined that municipal court records are public records to which the public has access with certain limitations as to confidential information contained therein. Opinion of + See morethe Attorney Gen-eral to the Honorable Bernice Kuykendall, Mayor, City of Cordova, dated September 2, 1987, A.G. No. 87-00303. As public records, the contents thereof, with certain limitations, may be published in the newspaper. Opinion of the Attorney General to the Honorable William T. Musgrove Jr., Attorney, City of Florence, dated October 6, 1988, A.G. No. 89-00003. The name, address, birth date, offense, and the amount of the past-due fine, as nonconfidential information contained in a municipal court record, may be published in a local newspaper as part of the collec-tion process. Id.
|
Enforcement |
Add to Dashboard
|
Alabama | Ala. Att'y Gen. Op. 2000-020 | Alabama-Attorney General opinion | Other applicable opinions |
When a defendant is arrested for failure to appear or failure to pay, Rule 4.3(b)(3), ARCrP, requires that a judge or magistrate conduct an initial appearance hearing within 72 hours + See moreof arrest if the defendant has not obtained his or her release from jail.
|
Regarding circumstances where a defendant fails to pay court-ordered monies, Rule 26.11, ARCrP, provides that a judge must conduct a hearing to determine the financial means of a defendant for + See morethe payment of court-ordered fines and costs, and authorizes imprisonment for non-indigent defendants who fail to pay. Rule 27.2, ARCrP, authorizes a judge to order a defendant to pay court costs and fines as a condition of probation. As previously discussed, in cases involving breaches of con¬ditions of probation, including conditions requiring payment of fines, costs, restitution, or other court-ordered assessments, the court must con¬duct an initial appearance hearing upon the arrest of a probationer before the probationer is incarcerated. The court must inquire into the proba¬tioner’s financial status and determine whether the probationer is indigent since incarceration of an indigent for nonpayment is prohibited.
|
Enforcement |
Add to Dashboard
|
Florida | AGO 99-03 | Municipality, contract with collection agency | Which fines and/or fees may be collected by a private vendor? | Liens (at least) | A municipality may enter into an agreement with a collection agency to compromise code enforcement board liens and pursue collection through litigation. | Enforcement |
Add to Dashboard
|
Florida | AGO 2008-47 | Courts, funds to renovate courthouse tower/café | Other applicable opinions |
the tower of the Sarasota County Courthouse as an integral structural component of the courthouse facility may be renovated using funds derived from section 318.18(13), Florida Statutes. Moreover, where the + See morecounty has made the decision to include a café in the county courthouse facility for use by court personnel and the general public, revenue collected pursuant to section 318.18(13), Florida Statutes, to fund court facilities may be used for the renovation of such space.
|
Revenue flow | |
Add to Dashboard
|
Florida | AGO 2008-46 | Counties -- Court Costs | Other applicable opinions |
Accordingly, it is my opinion that revenues generated by section 939.185, Florida Statutes, may be used to fund an alternative sanctions coordinator position created pursuant to sections 984.09 and 985.037, + See moreFlorida Statutes. Moreover, it is ultimately within the countyâs discretion whether to fund a "local requirement" designated by the chief judge of the circuit.
|
Revenue flow | |
Add to Dashboard
|
Florida | AGO 2007-52 | Clerks of Court, debts referred to collection agent | Other applicable opinions |
In light of the language of sections 28.246 and 28.35, Florida Statutes, it is my opinion that the clerk of court is not authorized to charge a fee to the + See morecollection agent or attorney for support services provided by the clerk when an unpaid amount owed to the clerk is referred to an agent for collection. Rather, any administrative support costs incurred by the clerk after referring unpaid fines and fees for collection should most appropriately be paid from "filing fees, service charges, court costs, and fines" as provided in section 28.35(4)(a), Florida Statutes.
|
Revenue flow | |
Add to Dashboard
|
Florida | AGO 2002-61 | Additional $2 cost for criminal justice education | Other applicable opinions |
Thus, this office concluded that the additional costs collected under section 943.25(13), Florida Statutes (1993), could only be used for courses that relate directly to criminal justice education and training + See morecourses and may not be used to fund general education for law enforcement officers, except in those instances where completion of general education courses is a requirement for successful completion of a criminal justice degree program.
|
Fines and fees | |
Add to Dashboard
|
Florida | AGO 2002-10 | Local governments' assessment of court costs | Other applicable opinions |
Accordingly, it is my opinion that the assessment authorized in section 938.15, Florida Statutes, is payable to the county or municipality by an individual who has been convicted of a + See moreviolation of the respective county or municipal ordinance and the court has included payment of the assessment in its order.
|
Fines and fees | |
Add to Dashboard
|
Florida | AGO 2001-40 | Teen court, mandatory court cost assessment | Other applicable opinions |
In sum:
1. Section 938.19, Florida Statutes, does not authorize the county to choose the offenses for which the $3 assessment authorized by section 938.19, Florida Statutes, may be imposed; rather, + See morethe statute specifies those offenses for which the assessment will be imposed.
2. Section 938.19, Florida Statutes, requires that funds received from the $3 assessment be deposited into an account specifically for the operation and administration of the teen court and does not authorize application of the funds to other programs or to the county's general revenue fund.
|
Fines and fees |