Below are the cases that meet your search criteria.

15 Results

Export results to Excel

State Citation Question Brief answer Language from the opinion When does the case apply?
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

Iowa State v. Van Hoff, 415 N.W.2d 647, 649 (Iowa 1987)
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 more
the 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).
A determination of reasonableness ... is more appropriately based on [a defendant's] ability to pay the current installments than his ability to ultimately pay the total amount due. A determination of reasonableness ... is more appropriately based on [a defendant's] ability to pay the current installments than his ability to ultimately pay the total amount due. Ability to pay
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

Iowa State v. Kurtz, 878 N.W.2d 469, 473 (Iowa Ct. App. 2016) A defendant who seeks to upset a restitution order has the burden to demonstrate either the failure of the court to exercise discretion or an abuse of that discretion. A defendant who seeks to upset a restitution order, however, has the burden to demonstrate either the failure of the court to exercise discretion or an abuse of that discretion. Ability to pay
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

Iowa Goodrich v. State, 608 N.W.2d 774, 776 (Iowa 2000) Ability to pay must be determined before imposition.
Constitutionally, a court must determine a criminal defendant's ability to pay before entering an order requiring such defendant to pay criminal restitution pursuant to Iowa Code section 910.2. Section 910.2
+ See more
authorizes a court to order the offender to make restitution of court costs and court-appointed attorney's fees “to the extent that the offender is reasonably able to do so.
Ability to pay
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

Iowa State v. Kurtz, 878 N.W.2d 469, 472 (Iowa Ct. App. 2016) Are there limits to the state’s ability to recoup fees for counsel under the state constitution?
The restitution ordered to the victim is made without regard to the defendant's ability to pay; however, other reimbursement and costs are ordered only to the extent that the defendant
+ See more
is reasonably able to pay.
The restitution ordered to the victim is made without regard to the defendant's ability to pay; however, other reimbursement and costs are ordered only to the extent that the defendant
+ See more
is reasonably able to pay. . . . Thus, before ordering payment for court-appointed attorney fees and court costs, the court must consider the defendant's ability to pay.
Ability to pay
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

Maryland 86 Md. Op. Att'y Gen. 183 (2001) (citing Reddick v. State, 608 A.2d 1246 (1992); Smith v. State, 506 A.2d 1165 (1986); Turner v. State, 516 A.2d 579 (1986)).
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 more
the 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).
All that is required is that the court must first assess the defendant's ability to pay the fine by inquiring into the defendant's family and financial situation before incarcerating defendant
+ See more
for inability to pay. No specific procedural mechanisms have been established.
"State law provides that a court may sentence a convicted defendant who has failed to pay a fine to an additional period of confinement to “work off” the fine. However,
+ See more
under both State law and the federal Constitution, the court must first assess the defendant's ability to pay the fine by inquiring into the defendant's family and financial situation. Any additional period of incarceration imposed for failure to pay the fine must be within statutory limits and may not, in any event, exceed 90 days. Finally, the total period of incarceration imposed on an indigent defendant may not exceed the statutory maximum for the underlying offense."
Ability to pay
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

Maryland
Md. Const. art. IV, § 18 (granting the Court of Appeals the authority to enacts rules with the force of law); see, e.g., MD R ADR Rule 17-208 (the Court
+ See more
of Appeals authorizes its Chief Judge to approve fee schedules)
Does the state’s separation of powers doctrine limit the ability of courts to impose or collect revenue? No. Maryland's Constitution allows the Court of Appeals to impose binding state-wide rules, including fines and fees.
"The Court of Appeals from time to time shall adopt rules and regulations concerning the practice and procedure in and the administration of the appellate courts and in the other
+ See more
courts of this State, which shall have the force of law until rescinded, changed or modified by the Court of Appeals or otherwise by law. The power of courts other than the Court of Appeals to make rules of practice and procedure, or administrative rules, shall be subject to the rules and regulations adopted by the Court of Appeals or otherwise by law." "Subject to the approval of the Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals, the county administrative judge of each circuit court shall develop and adopt maximum hourly rate fee schedules for court-designated individuals conducting each type of fee-for-service ADR"
Revenue flow
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

Maryland
Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 7-503; Rucker v. Harford Cty., 558 A.2d 399, 404 (Md. 1989) (citing Mayor & City Council of Baltimore v. State, 15 Md.
+ See more
376, 488 (1860) (Grand, C.J., concurring))
Under state constitutional or statutory law, under what circumstances will the imposition or enforcement of fees or fines create conflicts of interest for courts, police departments, probation departments, or other
+ See more
law enforcement agencies?
Law enforcement officials can collect fees. However, law enforcement officials should not be given any duties which directly conflict with their law enforcement duties.
“[T]he Constitution ... does not specify or describe the powers and duties of the sheriff. These are left to the common law and the Acts of Assembly.... There is nothing
+ See more
to prohibit the Legislature from adding to or diminishing his duties, provided those added be not in conflict with his office as sheriff.”
Enforcement
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

Maryland Baldwin v. State, 444 A.2d 1058, 1066 (Md. 1982) Are there limits to the state’s ability to recoup fees for counsel under the state constitution? The state may seek reimbursement of any amount which a defendant can reasonably be expected to pay.
"The initial determination, under the law, is to be made by the Public Defender; and to assist him in making it, § 7(b) authorizes him to “make such investigation of
+ See more
the financial status of each defendant at such time or times as the circumstances shall warrant....”Obviously cognizant that shifting sands of fortune might subsequently render inaccurate a previous eligibility determination, and also recognizing that time might not always permit a thorough investigation into the financial status of a defendant prior to the rendition of services, the General Assembly provided in art. 27A a comprehensive scheme whereby the Public Defender could obtain reimbursement from defendants later found able to pay for part or all of his services."
Ability to pay
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

Maryland Rutherford v. Rutherford, 464 A.2d 228, 237 (Md. 1983) Other applicable case law An indigent defendant in a civil contempt proceeding cannot be sentenced to incarceration unless he or she has been afforded the right to counsel
"Therefore, under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Article 24 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights, an indigent defendant in a civil contempt proceeding cannot be sentenced
+ See more
to incarceration unless he has been afforded the right to appointed counsel. This does not mean that a constitutional right to appointed counsel attaches in every civil contempt proceeding involving an indigent defendant. Rather, we hold only that, under the due process requirements of the federal and state constitutions, an indigent defendant in a civil contempt proceeding cannot be sentenced to actual incarceration unless counsel has been appointed to represent him or he has waived the right to counsel"
Ability to pay
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

Maryland McDaniel v. State, 45 A.3d 916, 924 (Md. 2012) Other applicable case law When a defendant is ordered to make restitution to a crime victim, the defendant must timely object or the issue is waived.
"When a court orders a defendant to make restitution to a crime victim, and the defendant believes that the court either fails to inquire into his ability to pay or
+ See more
errs in determining his ability to pay, the defendant must make a timely objection to the order, else the issue is waived"
Ability to pay
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

West Virginia State v. Murrell, 201 W. Va. 648, 649–50, 499 S.E.2d 870, 871–72 (1997).
Syl. Pt. 1, State v. Haught, 179 W.Va. 557, 371 S.E.2d 54 (1988).
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 more
the 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).
(1) While there is no prohibition against the imposition of the maximum penalty prescribed by law, indigent defendants may not be incarcerated solely because of their inability to pay court-ordered
+ See more
fines or costs. (2) The court may impose of a statutory fine without determination of ability to pay, but before a trial court conditions its recommendation for a defendant's parole upon the defendant's payment of statutory fines, costs and attorney's fees, the trial court must consider the financial resources of the defendant, the defendant's ability to pay and the nature of the burden that the payment of such costs will impose upon the defendant.
"An individual is not excused from the imposition of the maximum sentence allowed under a statute simply because he is indigent, even if that sentence includes the imposition of fines
+ See more
pursuant to statute. Consistent with the principles of Williams v. Illinois, 399 U.S. 235, 90 S.Ct. 2018, 26 L.Ed.2d 586 (1970), and *650 **872 Bearden v. Georgia, 461 U.S. 660, 103 S.Ct. 2064, 76 L.Ed.2d 221 (1983), however, while there is no prohibition against the imposition of the maximum penalty prescribed by law, indigent defendants may not be incarcerated solely because of their inability to pay court-ordered fines or costs." State v. Murrell, 201 W. Va. 648, 649–50, 499 S.E.2d 870, 871–72 (1997).
Ability to pay
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

West Virginia W. Va. Const. art. VIII, § 3 Does the state’s separation of powers doctrine limit the ability of courts to impose or collect revenue? No. West Virginia's Constitution allows the Court of Appeals to impose binding state-wide rules.
“The court shall have power to promulgate rules for all cases and proceedings, civil and criminal, for all of the courts of the State relating to writs, warrants, process, practice
+ See more
and procedure, which shall have the force and effect of law.”
Enforcement
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

West Virginia See generally §59-1-1 to §59-1-39. W. Va. Code §59-1-14.
Under state constitutional or statutory law, under what circumstances will the imposition or enforcement of fees or fines create conflicts of interest for courts, police departments, probation departments, or other
+ See more
law enforcement agencies?
The Court, Clerk of Court, Sheriff and Probation Dept can collect fines. Most fines and fees go into the general revenue fund (either state or county), but the West
+ See more
Virginia Deputy Sheriff Retirement Fundt fund receives a small amount from certain collections (see §59-1-14).
Revenue flow
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

West Virginia W. Va. Code § 29-21-16 Are there limits to the state’s ability to recoup fees for counsel under the state constitution?
No, not under the state constitution. However, state statutory law provides that "court shall not order a person to pay costs unless the person is able to pay without
+ See more
undue hardship."
(g) In the circumstances and manner set forth below, circuit judges may order repayment to the state, through the office of the clerk of the circuit court having jurisdiction over
+ See more
the proceedings, of the costs of representation provided under this article:(1) In every case in which services are provided to an indigent person and an adverse judgment has been rendered against such person, the court may require that person, and in juvenile cases, may require the juvenile's parents or custodian, to pay as costs the compensation of appointed counsel, the expenses of the defense and such other fees and costs as authorized by statute. (2) The court shall not order a person to pay costs unless the person is able to pay without undue hardship. In determining the amount and method of repayment of costs, the court shall take account of the financial resources of the person, the person's ability to pay and the nature of the burden that payment of costs will impose. The fact that the court initially determines, at the time of a case's conclusion, that it is not proper to order the repayment of costs does not preclude the court from subsequently ordering repayment should the person's financial circumstances change. (3) When a person is ordered to repay costs, the court may order payment to be made forthwith or within a specified period of time or in specified installments. If a person is sentenced to a term of imprisonment, an order for repayment of costs is not enforceable during the period of imprisonment unless the court expressly finds, at the time of sentencing, that the person has sufficient assets to pay the amounts ordered to be paid or finds there is a reasonable likelihood the person will acquire the necessary assets in the foreseeable future. (4) A person who has been ordered to repay costs, and who is not in contumacious default in the payment thereof, may at any time petition the sentencing court for modification of the repayment order. If it appears to the satisfaction of the court that continued payment of the amount ordered will impose undue hardship on the person or the person's dependents, the court may modify the method or amount of payment. (5) When a person ordered to pay costs is also placed on probation or imposition or execution of sentence is suspended, the court may make the repayment of costs a condition of probation or suspension of sentence.
Ability to pay
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

West Virginia State v. Stamm, 222 W. Va. 276, 281, 664 S.E.2d 161, 166 (2008) Other applicable case law In criminal failure to pay support cases, burden of reasonable ability to pay remains with the state.
"Accordingly, we now hold that, insofar as W. Va. Code § 61-5-29(3) (1999) (Repl. Vol. 2005) shifts to a defendant the burden of disproving a material element of the State's
+ See more
case [here, defendant's reasonable ability to provide was an element in 61-5-29(2), but reasonable ability to provide was also an affirmative defense in 61-5-29(3)], in violation of the due process clauses found in Article III, Section 10, of the Constitution of West Virginia, and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, that individual provision, severed from the remainder of W. Va. Code § 61-5-29, is unconstitutional and unenforceable."