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.
Case Law
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
| State | Citation | Question | Brief answer | Language from the opinion | When does the case apply? | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Washington | State v. Curry, 118 Wash.2d 911, 91516 (1992) |
Under state constitutional or statutory law, what are the minimum requirements for a constitutionally adequate ability-to-pay determination? Include any guidance about the substantive standards to apply, the burden of proof, + See morethe sources of information that should be considered, and the timing of the determination (i.e. before imposition, before enforcement action, only if incarceration is threatened).
|
If a judge imposes discretionary legal financial obligations, seven requirements must first be met |
The following requirements must be met:1. Repayment must not be mandatory;2. Repayment may be imposed only on convicted defendants;3. Repayment may only be ordered if the defendant is or will + See morebe able to pay;4. The financial resources of the defendant must be taken into account;5. A repayment obligation may not be imposed if it appears there is no likelihood the defendant's indigency will end;6. The convicted person must be permitted to petition the court for remission of the payment of costs or any unpaid portion; 7. The convicted person cannot be held in contempt for failure to repay if the default was not attributable to an intentional refusal to obey the court order or a failure to make a good faith effort to make repayment.
|
Ability to pay |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Washington | State v. Blank, 131 Wash.2d 230, 239-42 (1997) | Are there limits to the states ability to recoup fees for counsel under the state constitution? |
Yes, but they are incorporated into protections that do not directly speak to limitations on the state's ability to recoup fees, such as the defendant's inability to pay and the + See morecourt's obligation to inquire into a defendant's ability to pay
|
the procedural guidelines required by the Constitution, and mandated by this court, need not be specifically enumerated in the statute so long as the courts adhere to those requirements
Moreover, common + See moresense dictates that a determination of ability to pay and an inquiry into defendant's finances is not required before a recoupment order may be entered against an indigent defendant as it is nearly impossible to predict ability to pay over a period of 10 years or longer.6 However, we hold that before enforced collection or any sanction is imposed for nonpayment, there must be an inquiry into ability to pay.
State v. Blank, 131 Wash.2d 230, 239-42 (1997)
|
Revenue flow |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Washington | State v. Blazina, 182 Wash. 2d 827, 839, 344 P.3d 680, 685 (2015) | Other applicable case law | Imposition of discretionary fines and fees requires individualized inquiry into defendants ability to pay. |
We hold that RCW 10.01.160(3) requires the record to reflect that the sentencing judge made an individualized inquiry into the defendant's current and future ability to pay before the court + See moreimposes LFOs. This inquiry also requires the court to consider important factors, such as incarceration and a defendant's other debts, including restitution, when determining a defendant's ability to pay. Because the records in this case do not show that the sentencing judges made this inquiry into either defendant's ability to pay, we remand the cases to the trial courts for new sentence hearings.
|
Ability to pay |