As Court Fees Rise, The Poor Are Paying The Price
Many government services in the criminal justice system, which were once free, are now charged to defendants, many of which are low-income individuals who cannot afford them. By the 1980s, …
News
State-By-State Court Fees
This national survey identified the states that charge people fees for electronic monitoring, probation or supervision, public defender and legal costs, and other criminal justice system services.
Mitchell v. City of Montgomery
Unable to pay debt from traffic tickets, impoverished defendants were given the options of paying the debt immediately or sitting out their debt in jail at the rate of $50.00 a day. Those in jail were given the further option of performing janitorial services at the rate of $25.00 a day. No inquiry was made as to the defendant’s ability to pay.
Why Are Surcharges on Some NY Traffic Tickets Higher Than the Fine?
This video and news article tells the story of Pete Tanner, who received a speeding ticket and noticed that the fees attached to the ticket were higher than the underlying …
US: For-Profit Probation Tramples Rights of Poor
This video by Human Rights Watch shows how private probation companies can strip people of basic necessities and jail them because they can’t afford to pay their court debt and exorbitant probation fees.
The Burden of Criminal Justice Debt in Alabama
Foster Cook’s report includes quantitative and qualitative survey results from 943 participants from 13 counties in Alabama. The report includes information about the collateral consequences of increased court costs on incarcerated people in Alabama, including harsh penalties for nonpayment and the phenomenon of defendants turning to crime as a funding source to pay their fines and fees.
Cleveland v. City of Montgomery et al. & Watts v. City of Montgomery et al
The SPLC filed a lawsuit challenging Cleveland’s and Watts’ incarceration as a violation of the due process and equal protection clauses of the U.S. Constitution and the state constitution.
State v. Reyes
As the legislature did not provide that defendants bear the costs of DNA testing in the statute mandating DNA testing, the lower court had no basis to order Reyes to pay the testing fee and therefore erred in doing so.
Hawaii §706-641: Criteria for imposing fines
This Hawaii law specifies criteria that must be satisfied before a court can sentence a person to pay a fine. If the fine is the only punishment included in a sentence, the court cannot assess the fine unless “the person is or will be able to pay the fine,” and “the fine will not prevent the defendant from making restitution to the victim.”
Legal Financial Obligations: Fulfilling the Promise of Gideon by Reducing the Burden
Stearns examines the imposition and enforcement of Legal Financial Obligations (LFOs) in Washington State on people unable to pay them and argues that the resulting disparities impact the ability of the criminal justice system to impose fair and meaningful penalties that hold people accountable and reduce recidivism.