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.
22 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
|
Virginia | 2000 Va. Op. Att'y. Gen. (2000) | Costs and fines dischargeable in bankruptcy | Other applicable opinions |
"Criminal costs, which may or may not be contingent upon sentence but are associated with conviction, and traffic fines are nondischargeable in Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceedings. Debt for restitution or + See morecriminal fine included in criminal sentence is nondischargeable in Chapter 13 bankruptcy; criminal fines not contingent upon sentence, traffic fines arising from traffic infractions, and civil traffic fines are dischargeable in Chapter 13 bankruptcies."
|
Enforcement | |
Add to Dashboard
|
Alaska | Otton v. Zaborac, 525 P.2d 537, 538 (Alaska 1974) | Alaska-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?
|
Yes. For example, a defendant who is facing civil contempt must be guaranteed the right to counsel because of the "very real threat of incarceration." |
"Constitutional considerations lead us to the conclusion the defendant's interests will not be adequately protected without the assistance of appointed counsel. The Alaska Constitution provides that ‘(n)o person shall be + See moredeprived of . . . liberty . . . without due process of law.4 The federal constitution similarly provides that no state may deprive any person of liberty without due process. Mr. Otton's interest in freedom from restraint has constitutional dimensions. State action which infringes upon that interest must be in accordance with the requirements of due process."
|
Ability to pay |
Add to Dashboard
|
Alaska |
Jones v. State, No. A-2629, 1989 WL 1595378, at *1–2 (Alaska Ct. App. Feb. 1, 1989) (quoting Zimmerman v. State, 706 P.2d 343, 344 (Alaska App.1985); Karr v. State, 686 + See moreP.2d 1192, 1197 (Alaska 1984)); Alaska Stat. Ann. § 12.55.051
|
Alaska-Attorney General opinion | Does allowing different municipalities to set their own indigency standards or fines/fees violate the equal protection afforded by the state’s constitution? | Indigency is determined by trial courts in Alaska. Trial courts are not municipal in nature, but are State courts. |
"Under AS 12.55.035, the trial court is under a mandatory duty to consider a defendant's earning capacity in connection with the imposition of any fine. The court's inquiry must be + See more“serious” and should include an analysis of any assets that the defendant presently owns, as well as his past and future earning capacity. A determination of a defendant's future earning capacity necessarily requires the court to make:preliminary findings of fact regarding [the defendant's] mental and physical health, [his] education, [his] job skills if any, the kinds of jobs which [he] has held in the past and is capable of performing in the future and the availability of such jobs in the communities in which [the defendant] will likely reside. Once these findings are made, the court is in a position to determine [the defendant's] likely future earnings and the extent to which those earnings will cover [his] likely future expenses for food, clothing and shelter and leave [him] a surplus out of which to pay restitution. The court must fix the amount of the fine and the terms of payment to fall within the realistic limits of the defendant's earning capacity. Failure to make the appropriate inquiry and findings requires automatic reversal and remand." " If, at a hearing under this subsection, the defendant proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant will be unable through good faith efforts to satisfy the order requiring payment of the fine or restitution, the court shall modify the order so that the defendant can pay the fine or restitution through good faith efforts. The court may reduce the fine ordered, change the payment schedule, or otherwise modify the order. The court may not reduce an order of restitution but may change the payment schedule."
|
Ability to pay |
Add to Dashboard
|
Alaska | Alaska Stat. Ann. § 12.55.051(j) | Enforcement of fines and restitution | Which fines and/or fees may be collected by a private vendor? | This has not been articulated by the court or by the Attorney General. Statutory law seems to indicate that any fine or fee can be collected by a private vendor |
(j) The Department of Law may enter into contracts on behalf of the state to carry out the collection procedures of this section. The Department of Law may adopt regulations + See morenecessary to carry out the collection procedures of this section, including the reimbursement of attorney fees and costs in appropriate cases.
|
Enforcement |
Add to Dashboard
|
Alaska | Alaska Stat. Ann. § 12.55.051 | Enforcement of fines and restitution | Who has the burden of proof in an ability to pay determination? What is the standard of proof required? | Defendant has the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence. |
"[U]nder this subsection, the defendant proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant will be unable through good faith efforts to satisfy the order requiring payment of the + See morefine or restitution, the court shall modify the order so that the defendant can pay the fine or restitution through good faith efforts. The court may reduce the fine ordered, change the payment schedule, or otherwise modify the order."
|
Ability to pay |
Add to Dashboard
|
Alaska | Alaska Stat. Ann. § 12.55.051; Dodge v. Municipality of Anchorage, 877 P.2d 270, 272 (Alaska Ct. App. 1994) | Alaska-Attorney General opinion | Should ability to pay be considered when imposing fines or fees or only when collecting fines or fees? | Statutory law and case law suggest that the ability to pay need not be determined until after imposition. |
"A defendant who has been sentenced to pay a fine or restitution may request a hearing regarding the defendant's ability to pay the fine or restitution at any time that + See morethe defendant is required to pay all or a portion of the fine or restitution." "The law in effect at the time of Dodge's sentencing imposed no duty upon the court to inquire into Dodge's ability to pay the fine imposed."
|
Ability to pay |
Add to Dashboard
|
Alaska | Alaska Const. art. IV, § 15; Alaska Stat. Ann. § 22.05.020(c); Alaska Stat. Ann. § 28.05.151(a) | Rule-Making Power; Composition and general powers of supreme court; Citations for scheduled vehicle and traffic offenses | What authority does the state supreme court have to impose binding state-wide rules on the imposition or collection of fees and fines? |
The Alasaka Constitution allows the Supreme Court to promulgate rules governing practice and procedure. Furthermore, Alaska Statutory Law allows the Supreme Court to prescribe the fees which may be charged + See morefor legal services. Indeed, the Supreme Court can also determine which fines and fees may be collected without a court disposition
|
"The supreme court shall make and promulgate rules governing the administration of all courts. It shall make and promulgate rules governing practice and procedure in civil and criminal cases in + See moreall courts. These rules may be changed by the legislature by two-thirds vote of the members elected to each house." "The supreme court may prescribe by rule the fees to be charged by all courts for judicial services." "The supreme court shall determine by rule or order those motor vehicle and traffic offenses, except for offenses subject to a scheduled municipal fine, that are amenable to disposition without court appearance and shall establish a scheduled amount of bail, not to exceed fines prescribed by law, for each offense. A municipality shall determine by ordinance the municipal motor vehicle and traffic offenses that may be disposed of without court appearance and shall establish a fine schedule for each offense. "The supreme court shall determine by rule or order those motor vehicle and traffic offenses, except for offenses subject to a scheduled municipal fine, that are amenable to disposition without court appearance and shall establish a scheduled amount of bail, not to exceed fines prescribed by law, for each offense. A municipality shall determine by ordinance the municipal motor vehicle and traffic offenses that may be disposed of without court appearance and shall establish a fine schedule for each offense."
|
Fines and fees |
Add to Dashboard
|
Tennessee | Bradford v. Bradford, No. 86-262-II, 1986 WL 2874, at *5 (Tenn. Ct. App. Mar. 7, 1986); Daniels v. Grimac, 342 S.W.3d 511, 517 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2010) | Case law |
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?
|
Courts have recognzied that defendants are entitled to counsel, an opportunity to be heard, and notice in civil proceedings which may result in incarceration. |
We are of the opinion that in light of Lassiter, due process mandates that an indigent defendant has the right to be represented by counsel at a contempt proceeding whether + See moreit be called civil or criminal if the indigent defendant faces the loss of his freedom.
Indirect contempt arises from acts committed out of the presence of the court, and cannot be punished unless the accused has been given the due process protections of notice and an opportunity to be heard.
|
Enforcement |
Add to Dashboard
|
Tennessee | Cf. Tenn. Op. Att'y Gen. No. 89-03 (Jan. 12, 1989) | Imprisonment for Contempt of Non-Payment of Fines | Does allowing different municipalities to set their own indigency standards or fines/fees violate the equal protection afforded by the states constitution? | Municipalities can set their own standards as long as the standards comply with constitutional and statutory protections |
"The municipal charter provides that the city court may imprison a party for up to ten days for violation of city ordinances, and the city council has passed a resolution + See moreto this effect.It appears that the municipal provision outlined above complies with the procedures described in T.C.A. § 4024104, as well as constitutional safeguards, for determination of the defendant's ability to pay, thereby giving rise to an inference of willful disobedience and contempt of court where there has been a subsequent missed payment without notice of good cause to the court."
|
Ability to pay |
Add to Dashboard
|
Tennessee | See Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-24-105(d)(1) | Collection; fines, costs and litigation taxes; license revocation | Which fines and/or fees may be collected by a private vendor? | Statutory law provides that all fines and fees may be collected by a private vendor when a defendant has been in default for more than six months. |
"After a fine, costs, or litigation taxes have been in default for at least six (6) months, the district attorney general or criminal or general sessions court clerk may retain + See morean agent to collect, or institute proceedings to collect, or establish an in-house collection procedure to collect, fines, costs and litigation taxes."
|
Enforcement |
Add to Dashboard
|
Tennessee | Tenn. Op. Att'y Gen. No. 89-104 (Aug. 17, 1989) (citing State ex rel. Wright v. Upchurch, 254 S.W.2d 748, 749 (Tenn. 1953)) | Whether a Defendant Found in Willful Contempt of Court for Failure to Pay Child Support May Be Incarcerated Where He Lacks the Present Ability to Pay the Arrearage. | Who has the burden of proof in an ability to pay determination? What is the standard of proof required? | At least in civil contempt proceedings, the burden of proof is on the defendant. |
"In any case, the inability to pay is an affirmative defense to a petition for civil contempt and the burden of proof is on the defendant to establish his inability + See moreto pay."
|
Ability to pay |
Add to Dashboard
|
Tennessee | Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-24-104; Tenn. Op. Att'y Gen. No. 89-03 (Jan. 12, 1989) | Imprisonment for Contempt for NonPayment of Fines | Should ability to pay be considered when imposing fines or fees or only when collecting fines or fees? | Statutory law provides that ability to pay must be considered when collecting fines, but at least some courts consider ability to pay when imposing fines and fees as well. |
If the defendant fails to pay the fine as directed, or is unable to pay the fine and so represents upon application to the court, the court, after inquiring into + See moreand making further investigation, if any, which it may deem necessary with regard to the defendant's financial and family situation and the reasons for nonpayment of the fine, including whether the nonpayment was contumacious or was due to indigency, may enter any order that it could have entered under § 40-24-101, or may reduce the fine to an amount that the defendant is able to pay, or may direct that the defendant be imprisoned until the fine, or any portion of it, remaining unpaid or remaining undischarged after a pro rata credit for any time that may already have been served in lieu of payments, is paid. The court shall determine and specify, in the light of defendant's situation and means and of defendant's conduct with regard to the nonpayment of the fine, the period of any imprisonment in default of payment of the fine within the limits of the penalties for a Class C misdemeanor.
In the instant situation, the following circumstances form the factual basis resulting in the issuance of a capias for contempt of court: When a fine is imposed, a hearing is held at the same time to determine the defendant's ability to pay. If it appears that defendant cannot pay, the case is continued for several months to see if circumstances change during that time. If the court determines that defendant is able to pay or to make payments, a payment schedule is set up. Defendant is instructed at that time to notify the court if any emergency comes up and, if so, the court will consider defendant's excuse. If defendant thereafter misses a payment and has not notified the court, then a capias is issued for his arrest for contempt of court, since there has already been a finding that that defendant is able to pay.
|
Ability to pay |
Add to Dashboard
|
Tennessee | Town of Nolensville v. King, 151 S.W.3d 427, 433 (Tenn. 2004); TN Const. Art. 6, § 14; | case law | What authority do county or municipal courts have to set fines or fees? | The Tennessee constitution does not allow a county or municipal court to set a fine or fee greater than $50 without a trial by jury. |
"Accordingly, for the reasons stated herein, we hold that Article VI, section 14 of the Tennessee Constitution prohibits a municipal court judge from imposing fines in excess of fifty dollars + See morefor a violation of a municipal ordinance, absent a valid waiver of the defendant's Article VI, section 14 right."
|
Fines and fees |