Litigation Archives - Page 9 of 12 - Fines and Fees Justice Center

Rubicon Programs, et al. v. Superior Court of California, County of Solano, et al.

Summary of the cause of action Solano County Superior Court routinely informed the DMV of persons who fail to pay their court fines and fees or fail to appear to …

Canaan v. City of El Paso

This case challenged the City of El Paso’s payment policy for Class C misdemeanors – usually parking tickets.

City of Slater v. State (Missouri)

This case challenged the constitutionality of a $3 surcharge imposed on litigants in municipal court for the sheriff’s retirement fund. The trial court dismissed for lack of standing. The appellants claimed to have standing as taxpayers, administrators, and as one who paid the surcharge.

Nelson v. Colorado

The question before the U.S. Supreme Court was whether the State is required to return court fines and fees paid upon conviction when the conviction is reversed on appeal. Both Petitioners’ convictions were reversed on appeal, and they sought a refund of the fines and fees they paid.

Complaint to the Department of Justice Regarding National Origin Discrimination in the First Parish Court of Jefferson Parish

After being convicted of traffic violations, the four complainants were sentenced to pay for and attend English classes and charged high fees for interpreter services in addition to court fines …

Luse v. Sentinel Offender Services

The case alleged that Sentinel’s practice of requiring people under its supervision to pay for and undergo drug testing without a court order violated due process and constituted an unconstitutional search.

United States v. City of Ferguson

The complaint alleged, among other things, that the City’s conduct related to the imposition and enforcement of fines and fees for traffic and other municipal code violations was unconstitutional.

McKee et al. v. City of Amarillo

Amarillo residents were jailed through the City’s “pay or lay” policy. It stated, “…except as otherwise provided, the Court shall require the defendant to remain in custody… until the fine, State imposed fees and other penalties are paid."

Complaint against Judge Wiggins, No. 45 Alabama Fourth Judicial Circuit (Jan. 2016)

On September 17, 2015, Circuit Judge Wiggins from Perry County Alabama threatened defendants who appeared before him for a previously scheduled “pay-due” docket. He informed them, “If you do not have any money and you do not want to go to jail…you can give blood today…bring in a receipt indicating that you gave blood…”

People v. Hakes

Hakes could not afford to make any payments. Probation was revoked because he was unable to pay. Hakes filed a complaint stating payment for the bracelet is punitive and does not promote public safety.