Below are the cases that meet your search criteria.

14 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

Kansas State v. McGlothin, 747 P.2d 1335, 1338 (Kan. 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).
The trial judge is statutorily required to make specific findings before imposing a fine and also must state on the record that she has taken into account the defendant's financial
+ See more
resources and the nature of the burden that payment of the fine would impose.
"The statute requires and we hold that where the defendant is convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor and is sentenced to imprisonment either in the county jail or in
+ See more
the custody of the secretary of corrections and a fine is to be imposed, the judge must make specific findings pursuant to 21–4607(2) before imposing a fine. The judge must also state on the record that he or she has taken into account the financial resources of the defendant and the nature of the burden that payment of the fine will impose, as required by 21–4607(3)."
Ability to pay
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

Kansas State v. Robinson, 132 P.3d 934, 940 (Kan. 2006). Are there limits to the state’s ability to recoup fees for counsel under the state constitution?
The sentencing court must consider the financial resources of the defendant and the nature of the burden that payment will impose explicitly, stating on the record how those factors have
+ See more
been weighed in the court's decision.
"First, the sentencing court, at the time of initial assessment, must consider the financial resources of the defendant and the nature of the burden that payment will impose explicitly, stating
+ See more
on the record how those factors have been weighed in the court's decision. Without an adequate record on these points, meaningful appellate review of whether the court abused its discretion **941 in setting the amount and method of payment of the fees would be impossible. See State v. Moncla, 269 Kan. 61, 65, 4 P.3d 618 (2000) (noting difficulty of reviewing case in which district court failed to state findings, conclusions). Second, a sentencing court's failure to include such explicit consideration of the defendant's financial circumstances in the record does not render the sentence associated with the resulting assessment *547 “illegal,” as that term is used in Kan. Stat. Ann. § 22–3504. As we have already said, the assessment itself is not punitive; it is not a punishment or part of the sentence at all. Its connection to a sentence does not convert that sentence to one fitting the narrow definition of “illegal,” i.e., a sentence imposed by a court without jurisdiction; a sentence that does not conform to the statutory provision, either in the character or the term of the punishment authorized; or a sentence that is ambiguous with respect to the time and means in which it is to be served. See State v. Gayden, 281 Kan. 290, Syl. ¶ 1, 130 P.3d 108 (2006).
Ability to pay
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

Kansas State v. Goeller, 77 P.3d 1272, 1276 (Kan. 2003). The defendant had the burden to present evidence of his or her inability to pay restitution.
The plain language of Kan. Stat. Ann. §2002 Supp. 21-4603d(b)(1) requires restitution “unless” the court finds a plan of restitution unworkable. Moreover, “[i]f the court finds a plan of restitution unworkable, the
+ See more
court shall state on the record in detail the reasons therefor.” The design of this provision makes clear that restitution is the rule and a finding that restitution is unworkable the exception. It also leads us to conclude that it is a defendant's burden to come forward with evidence of his or her inability to pay.
Ability to pay
BS-+-Light-Rounded-Square
Add to Dashboard

+ Create New

Kansas State v. Tafoya, 372 P.3d 1247, 1252 (Kan. 2016).
A sentence is not rendered illegal simply because the district court judge fails to consider the financial resources of the defendant when determining either the discretionary amount of a fine
+ See more
or the discretionary method of payment.
"[W]e conclude that a sentence is not rendered **1252 illegal simply because the district court judge fails to consider (or fails to state on the record that he or she
+ See more
has considered) the financial resources of the defendant when determining either the discretionary amount of a fine or the discretionary method of payment. Moreover, a remand from an appellate court to a district court pursuant to these authorities to correct this error is, in substance, not a remand for resentencing. As such, the Tafoya I panel was substantively correct when it limited its mandate to vacating the fine and instructing the district court to reconsider “the method of payment of the fine.”
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