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
|
Nebraska | State ex rel. Douglas v. Gradwohl, 194 Neb. 745 (1975) | Exemption of certain type or class of offense from the imposition of costs is not an unconstitutional classification. |
If it is constitutional for the Legislature to vary penalties according to its judgment of the seriousness of the offense, it may clearly mitigate the burden of costs as well. + See moreIt may be true that technically costs assessed are not part of the punishment or penalty for an offense. The plaintiff cites cases from other jurisdictions which so hold. However, it does not then necessarily follow that exempting a certain type or class of offense from the imposition of costs constitutes an unconstitutional classification.
|
Fines and fees | |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Pennsylvania |
Com. v. Verilla, 526 A.2d 398, 403 (1987). See also: Com. v. Opara, 362 A.2d 305, 312 (1976); Com. v. Pride, 380 A.2d 1267, 1270 (1977); Com. v. Johnson, 187 + See moreA.2d 761 (1963); Com. v. Terry, 368 A.2d 279, 280 (1977)
|
Are there limits to the state’s ability to recoup fees for counsel under the state constitution? | Legislature must act for fees for counsel to be recouped from defendant |
Clearly, Damario (In re Estate of Damario, 488 Pa. 434, 412 A.2d 842(1980)) cannot be construed to permit assessment of counsel fees by a trial court simply because Appellant was + See moreassigned court-appointed counsel, even though he was not ruled indigent.
Notwithstanding the fact that there exists no case law addressing the precise issue presently before this Court, we draw support from those cases which require a finding of statutory authority before the trial court's order of reimbursement to a public defender's office would be upheld. See Commonwealth v. Terry, 470 Pa. 234, 368 A.2d 279 (1977); Commonwealth v. Pride, 252 Pa.Super. 34, 380 A.2d 1267 (1977); Commonwealth v. Opara, 240 Pa.Super. 511, 362 A.2d 305 (1975).
Absent an indication by our legislature sanctioning the assessment of counsel fees for court-appointed counsel, we decline to validate orders granting such relief to counties. Parenthetically we note that § 3 of the Act of January 19, 1968, P.L. 984, 19 P.S. § 793, at one time provided for the reimbursement by a criminal defendant or a relative of the defendant to the county “for compensation and expense incurred and paid to court-appointed counsel”. However, this statute has since been repealed, 1984, October 12, P.L. 959, No. 187, § 6.
|
Fines and fees |