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
|
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 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).
|
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 |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
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 | |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
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 moreauthorizes 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 | |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
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 moreis 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 moreis 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 |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
New Mexico | State ex rel. Dept. of Human Services v. Rael, 642 P.2d 1099, 1104 (N.M. 1982) |
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).
|
The New Mexico Supreme Court has recognized that in a civil contempt proceeding, defendants are not entitled to court-appointed counsel. |
"The trial court is the proper evaluator of the need for counsel on a case-by-case basis, considering factors such as the indigent's ability to understand the proceeding, the complexity of + See morethe legal and factual issues, and the defenses that might be presented. We hold that the trial court must make a case-by-case determination, based on articulated reasons, whether fundamental fairness requires the appointment of counsel to assist an indigent defendant in a nonsupport civil contempt proceeding, and may, in the exercise of its sound discretion, appoint counsel in the proper case."
|
Enforcement |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
New Mexico | State v. Anaya, 76 N.M. 572, 577 (1966) |
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).
|
The defendant must make a reasonable showing that he is unable to pay, then the court must inquire into the showing made. |
"The burden of proceeding rests first upon the defendant. It is proper for the trial court to require defendant to make a reasonable showing that he is unable to employ + See morecounsel. Depending on the facts, more than one inquiry may be necessary. In Elliott v. District Court In & For City & County of Denver, 402 P.2d 65 (Colo.1965), the defendant informed the court that he had an expectancy of money. When the expectancy failed to materialize, he brought it to attention of the court at a later date. When defendant makes a reasonable showing of indigency in support of his request for court-appointed counsel, the trial court has a duty under s 41—11—2, N.M.S.A. 1953, to inquire into the facts claimed by defendant. This does not require an independent inquiry by the court. It does require sufficient questioning by the court to enable the court either to decide the question of indigency at that time or to direct that defendant is to report further to the court on the question of obtaining counsel.”
|
Ability to pay |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
New Mexico | State v. Lack, 650 P.2d 22, 29 (Ct. App. N.M. 1982); State v. Anaya, 76 N.M. 572, 577 (1966) |
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).
|
Defendants must be granted notice, an opportunity to dispute the amount, and an opportunity to demonstrate the inability to pay.
If the defendant makes a showing of indigency, the court must + See moreinquire into whether the defendant is indigent. This does not require an independent inquiry, but it does require sufficient questioning to enable the court decide whether the defendant is indigent.
|
"Implicit in the provisions of s 31-17-1, supra, requiring the preparation of a restitution plan, is the giving of notice to defendant of the amount of restitution claimed, the opportunity + See moreto dispute the amount thereof, and inquiry into defendant's ability to pay restitution. Due process is satisfied by affording the defendant an opportunity to challenge the amount of restitution claimed by the victim when there is a factual basis in the record to support the trial court's calculations as to the proper sum of restitution"
“When defendant makes a reasonable showing of indigency in support of his request for court-appointed counsel, the trial court has a duty under s 41—11—2, N.M.S.A. 1953, to inquire into the facts claimed by defendant. This does not require an independent inquiry by the court. It does require sufficient questioning by the court to enable the court either to decide the question of indigency at that time or to direct that defendant is to report further to the court on the question of obtaining counsel.”
|
Ability to pay |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
New Mexico | State v. Mabry, 630 P.2d 269, 273 (N.M. 1981) |
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).
|
Yes. Only the legislature can establish penalties for criminal behavior. |
"[T]he scope of our review is here limited to whether the Legislature had the power to enact these statutes. It has long been recognized in this state that it is + See moresolely within the province of the Legislature to establish penalties for criminal behavior."
|
Fines and fees |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
New Mexico | State v. Holland, 91 N.M. 386, 387 (N.M. Ct. App. 1978) |
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).
|
The imposition of a fine or fee is valid only to the extent it conforms with the sentences that are permissible under statutory law. |
"A basic proposition of New Mexico law is that the fixing of penalties is a legislative function, that the trial court's authority is to impose the sentence authorized by law. + See moreSentences or portions thereof which are unauthorized by law are void."
|
Enforcement |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
New Mexico | N.M. Stat. Ann. § 31-16-7 |
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).
|
No, but statutory law does. N.M. Stat. Ann. § 31-16-7 allows the district attorney to recover payment only from those who were not entitled indigent legal assistance when they received. |
A. The district attorney may, on behalf of the state, recover payment or reimbursement, as the case may be, from each person who has received legal assistance or another benefit + See moreunder the Indigent Defense Act:(1) to which he was not entitled;
(2) with respect to which he was not a needy person when he received it; or
(3) with respect to which he has failed to make the certificate required by Section 62 B of the Indigent Defense Act and for which he refuses to pay. Suit must be brought within six years after the date on which the aid was received.
B. The district attorney may, on behalf of the state, recover payment or reimbursement, as the case may be, from each person other than a person covered by Subsection A who has received legal assistance under the Indigent Defense Act and who, on the date on which suit is brought, is financially able to pay or reimburse the state for it according to the standards of ability to pay applicable under the Indigent Defense Act but refuses to do so. Suit must be brought within three years after the date on which the benefit was received.
C. Amounts recovered under this section shall be paid to the state treasurer for credit to the state general fund.
|
Ability to pay |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
New Mexico | State ex rel. Quintana v. Schnedar, 855 P.2d 562, 568 (N.M. 1993) |
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).
|
Courts should give great deference to the determination of indigency made by the public defender's office when deciding whether a defendant is indigent. |
The inherent power of the judiciary to appoint counsel for indigent defendants is within the unique province of the courts to ensure the constitutionality of criminal prosecutions. The PDA and + See morethe IDA create the statutory apparatus for providing legal representation to indigent criminal defendants. These statutes and other provisions indicate that the Department will determine under its guidelines whether a particular defendant is indigent and therefore entitled to the legal assistance of a public defender. Courts should give great deference to such determinations by the Department, although they retain the ultimate authority to determine indigence and the discretionary ability to order the appointment of a public defender when it is necessary to protect the defendant's constitutional or statutory rights.
|
Ability to pay |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Wyoming | Murray v. State, 855 P.2d 350), (WY 1993) |
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).
|
With respect to imposing a surcharge on a defendant under Section 1-40-119, the court is required to find an ability to pay before ordering an assessment. |
We agree with Appellant that the court was required to find that he had [**28] an ability to pay before ordering the assessment. Murray v. State, 1993 Wyo. LEXIS 110, *27-28, + See more855 P.2d 350, 359 (Wyo. 1993)
|
Ability to pay |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Wyoming | Murray v. State, 855 P.2d 350), (Wyo. 1993) |
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).
|
With respect to imposing restitution under Section 7-9-103(a) and 7-9-102, the court must only make a specific finding when the defendant does not have any ability to pay. |
Henceforth, the court must make a specific finding only when the defendant does not have a present or prospective ability to pay. Although the court is not required to specifically + See morefind that a defendant has the ability to pay, the record must still contain evidence to support the existence of a present or future ability to pay. Murray v. State, 1993 Wyo. LEXIS 110, *26-27, 855 P.2d 350, 359 (Wyo. 1993)
|
Ability to pay |
|
Add to Dashboard
|
Wyoming | Billis v. State, 800 P.2d 401, 433, (Wyo. 1990) | Are there limits to the state’s ability to recoup fees for counsel under the state constitution? | The court has the authority to require the defendant's payment of his legal fees. |
Under W.S. 7-6-106(d) (June 1987 Repl.) the courts have the authority to order a defendant to repay the state for the cost of defense services.
Billis v. State, 800 P.2d 401, + See more433, 1990 Wyo. LEXIS 119, *100 (Wyo. 1990)
|
Fines and fees |