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.
2 Results
State | Citation | Description/Statute Name | Question | Brief answer | Language from the opinion | When does the case apply? | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Add to Dashboard
|
Arizona | 1989 Ariz. Op. Att'y Gen. 134 (1989) | Arizona-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? | The Arizona Constitution grants the Supreme Court the right to impose binding state-wide rules for procedural matters related to fines and fees. |
"The Arizona Supreme Court's rulemaking power is derived from Ariz. Const. art. VI, § 5 which gives the supreme court the “[p]ower to make rules relative to all procedural matters + See morein any court.” "
|
Enforcement |
Add to Dashboard
|
Arkansas | Opinion No. 96-208 | Imprisonment for failure to pay - double jeopardy | Other applicable opinions |
No, it does not constitute double jeopardy to imprison a person for failure to pay a fine when the person has already had his probation revoked, and has served a + See moreterm of imprisonment, for failing to satisfy, as a condition of his probation, his obligation to pay the fine -- if the person is not indigent.
|
"such a course of action is authorized by law and does not violate U.S. Const. amend. 5 or Ark. Const. art. 2, + See more § 8, the constitutional provisionsprohibiting the placing of a person in jeopardy more than once for the same offense."
|
Enforcement |