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
|
Nevada | 1987 Nev. Op. Att'y Gen. 29 (1987) | Execution of sentence and fine | Should ability to pay be considered when imposing fines or fees or only when collecting fines or fees? | court hearing must be held to determine a criminal defendant's ability to pay, before a criminal fine may be converted to an additional term of imprisonment. | under Nevada law a court hearing must be held to determine a criminal defendant's ability to pay, before a criminal fine may be converted to an additional term of imprisonment. | Ability to pay |
Add to Dashboard
|
Nevada | 1993 Nev. Op. Att'y Gen. 102 (1993) | Fines, judgments, judges | What authority do county or municipal courts have to set fines or fees? | Courts may, in the exercise of their judgment, set fines and fees. |
NRS 244.207, which authorizes counties to establish a collection division to collect fees and monetary sanctions imposed by courts that are ultimately owed to the county when collected, does not + See moreviolate Nevada's separation of powers provision. Although all collection efforts can be deferred by the courts, the legislative intent underlying NRS 244.207(1)(f) is to not impede collection efforts pending court rulings at any level. There is nothing in this statutory provision which impedes the courts in the exercise of their inherent judicial power to enforce their judgments and orders. Therefore, NRS 244.207 is constitutional.
|
Fines and fees |
Add to Dashboard
|
Nevada | 1987 Nev. Op. Att'y Gen. 29 (1987) | Criminal law - execution of sentence of imprisonment and fine | Other applicable opinions |
District Attorney may collect fines and fees when he prosecuted the case, attorney general may collect fines and fees when the attorney general's office prosecuted the case, and the Department + See moreof Prisons may only colelct fines and fees only when specifically granted the authority to do so by law.
|
Nevada statutes presently provide two methods for enforcement and collection of a criminal fine. See Nev.Rev.Stat. §§ 176.065 and 176.275. In both cases, the district attorney has authority to proceed + See moreto collect the fine on a criminal judgment where the district attorney has been the prosecutor. On the other hand, there is no clear authority in the office of the attorney general to undertake any action to collect the fines which have been imposed in criminal cases prosecuted by a district attorney. The attorney general would have authority to take action to enforce fines in cases prosecuted by the attorney general. See Nev.Rev.Stat. § 228.125. Similarly, the Department of Prisons has no specific authority to collect fines through deductions from wages or other property of offenders, or to institute any action against an offender to obtain the payment of a fine. The department is given specific authority to collect only certain debts owed by inmates, such as restitution or family support. See Nev.Rev.Stat. § 209.346 and 209.4811-209.4843; 209.352. Criminal fines are not included as a debt which may be collected by the Department of Prisons. This specific grant of authority to collect only certain debts implies a lack of authority to collect others. See Galloway v. Truesdell, 83 Nev. 13, 26, 422 P.2d 237 (1967). .
|
Revenue flow |
Add to Dashboard
|
Nevada | 1984 Nev. Op. Att'y Gen. 35 (1984) | Constitutional law - evidence-criminal procedure | Only nonindigent persons may be the subject of recoupment measures |
Where the legislature provides an express statutory system for recoupment of litigation costs from a convicted defendant the courts will generally enforce these provisions despite constitutional challenges. An implicit condition + See morefor the imposition of costs upon the convicted offender is that only nonindigent persons can be the subject of recoupment measures.
These statutes do not have a chilling effect on the exercise of other constitutional rights under the fifth and sixth amendments.
|
Ability to pay | |
Add to Dashboard
|
Nevada | 1987 Nev. Op. Att'y Gen. 29 (1987) | Criminal law - execution of sentence of imprisonment and fine |
District Attorney may collect fines and fees when he prosecuted the case, attorney general may collect fines and fees when the attorney general's office prosecuted the case, and the Department + See moreof Prisons may only collect fines and fees only when specifically granted the authority to do so by law.
|
Nevada statutes presently provide two methods for enforcement and collection of a criminal fine. See Nev.Rev.Stat. §§ 176.065 and 176.275. In both cases, the district attorney has authority to proceed + See moreto collect the fine on a criminal judgment where the district attorney has been the prosecutor. On the other hand, there is no clear authority in the office of the attorney general to undertake any action to collect the fines which have been imposed in criminal cases prosecuted by a district attorney. The attorney general would have authority to take action to enforce fines in cases prosecuted by the attorney general. See Nev.Rev.Stat. § 228.125. Similarly, the Department of Prisons has no specific authority to collect fines through deductions from wages or other property of offenders, or to institute any action against an offender to obtain the payment of a fine. The department is given specific authority to collect only certain debts owed by inmates, such as restitution or family support. See Nev.Rev.Stat. § 209.346 and 209.4811-209.4843; 209.352. Criminal fines are not included as a debt which may be collected by the Department of Prisons. This specific grant of authority to collect only certain debts implies a lack of authority to collect others. See Galloway v. Truesdell, 83 Nev. 13, 26, 422 P.2d 237 (1967). .
|
Fines and fees | |
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
|
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 morecollect 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 |
Add to Dashboard
|
Kansas | Kan. Att'y Gen. Op. No. 84-25 (Mar. 20, 1984) | Criminal ProcedureCosts in Criminal CasesLiability 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 morethe 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 moreconfinement 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 |
Add to Dashboard
|
Montana | 49 Mont. Op. Att'y Gen. No. 18, 2002 WL 1009805 | Montana-Attorney General opinion | What authority do county or municipal courts have to set fines or fees? |
The Montana Constitution and Montana law authorize amunicipal court judge to release a defendant on a time-pay
bail bond, defined as a bond in an amount set by the judge
to be + See morepaid in installments.
|
If the court finds some form of bail necessary, however, Mont. Code Ann. § 46-9-301, provides more specific factors for a court to consider. These factors include, among other matters + See morenot related to the safety of the victim and the community, that the amount shall be not oppressive, and that the amount shall be
considerate of the financial ability of the accused. Id., §§ 46-9-301(4) and (6). The time-pay bail bonds system comports with these requirements.The Montana Constitution and Montana law authorize a municipal court judge to release a defendant on a time-pay bail bond, defined as a bond in an amount set by the judge to be paid in installments.
|
Ability to pay |
Add to Dashboard
|
Montana | 41 Mont. Op. Att'y Gen. No. 59 | Montana-Attorney General opinion | Other applicable opinions | Cash bail for minor offenses may be increased to include applicable surcharges |
In order to collect the additional $10 charge required by section 46-18-236, MCA, a court may exercise its power under section 46-9-302, MCA, and increase the bail schedule for minor + See moreoffenses in a like amount.
|
Enforcement |
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 |