Criminal Justice Policy Program at Harvard Law School
50-State Criminal Justice Debt Reform Builder Bringing transparency to areas of significant legal complexity.
50-State Criminal Justice Debt Reform Builder Bringing transparency to areas of significant legal complexity.
Attorney General Opinions
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
When does this apply
Below are the attorney general opinions that meet your search criteria.
5 Results
| State | Citation | Description/Statute Name | Question | Brief answer | Language from the opinion | When does the case apply? | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Illinois |
1997 Ill. Atty. Gen. Op. 027 (Ill.A.G.), 1997 WL 824988; 1984 Ill. Atty. Gen. Op. 72 (Ill.A.G.), 1984 WL 60051; 1992 WL 469747 (Ill.A.G.); 1985 Ill. Atty. Gen. Op. 126 + See more(Ill.A.G.), 1985 WL 68980
|
Illinois-Attorney General opinion | What authority do county or municipal courts have to set fines or fees? | Fines and fees | ||
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Mississippi | 1981 WL 39784 (Miss.A.G.); Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19-20 (2) | Mississippi-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? | apparently not, because judges rule on indigency on a case-by-case basis |
In the event an indigent is unable to pay his fine, a justice court judge may rely upon Section 99-19-20 of the Mississippi Code, 1972 , as amended, as an + See morealternative procedure in working with indigents.
|
Ability to pay |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Mississippi | 1996 WL 224005 (Miss.A.G.) | Mississippi-Attorney General opinion | What authority do county or municipal courts have to set fines or fees? | The court has the authority to impose "reasonable" fees for costs incurred by the court system. | In response, see the Primeaux opinion which states that Mississippi Code Annotated Section 21-23-7(11) allows a municipal court to impose reasonable costs of court which could include a service of process fee. | Fines and fees |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
South Carolina | S.C.A.G. July 15, 1996 (informal opinion) | Setting fees | Does allowing different municipalities to set their own indigency standards or fines/fees violate the equal protection afforded by the state’s constitution? | Not answered as to indigency - however, municipalities cannot set their own fees not in accordance with State statutes |
it is the opinion of this Office that all fee schedules used in the various counties based upon ordinances and special statutes are unconstitutional and that the only fee schedule + See moreavailable for the services enumerated is to be found under South Carolina Code Section 27-53 (1976) [replaced by Act No. 164 of 1979]
|
Fines and fees |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
South Carolina | 1987 S.C. Op. Att'y Gen. 255 (1987) | Bearden | Should ability to pay be considered when imposing fines or fees or only when collecting fines or fees? | Not answered - however, cannot implement a surcharge if defendant fails to pay fee |
In the circumstances where an indigent fails to comply with the schedule of payments established by the court and the court determines that the indigent has wilfully refused to pay + See moreor failed to make bona fide efforts to pay, the court is authorized to imprison the defendant for contempt. As provided in Section 17–25–350, where part of the fine has been paid, the imprisonment cannot exceed the remaining pro rata portion of the sentence. I am unaware of any basis for a court to impose a fine in addition to the sentence originally imposed.
|
Ability to pay |