Justices: Colorado policy on court fees unconstitutional




WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that Colorado's practice of not automatically refunding court fees and other costs to people convicted of crimes but later exonerated violates the Constitution.

The 7-1 decision sided with two people whose convictions for sexual offenses were later thrown out. One paid about $700 in court fees, including victim restitution, while the other paid more than $4,400 in similar costs.

Colorado law had required people cleared of wrongdoing to recover their costs in a separate civil lawsuit. But they could not get a refund unless they proved their innocence by clear and convincing evidence.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said those hurdles violated the due process rights of criminal defendants.

"The state may not retain their money simply because their convictions were in place when the funds were taken, for once those convictions were erased, the presumption of Nelson's and Madden's innocence was restored," Ginsburg said.

Colorado appeared to be the only state that didn't automatically refund such fees.

Justice Samuel Alito wrote separately to say that that the majority went too far in saying that an award of victim restitution should always be returned when a defendant's conviction is reversed.

Justice Clarence Thomas dissented, saying the defendants did not have a constitutional right to recover costs and fees they paid to the state.

Justice Neil Gorsuch did not take part in the U.S. Supreme Court case, which was argued before he took his seat on the court.

Spurred by the Supreme Court case, Colorado's Legislature passed a bill giving those exonerated a refund of court costs and other fees without having to prove their innocence again. Gov. John Hickenlooper signed the bill into law in March, and it goes into effect Sept. 1.

The measure was supported by Colorado Attorney General Cynthia Coffman, who defended the state before the Supreme Court.

"With the clarity we received from the Supreme Court today, I hope Colorado's new law can be an example for other states. We now have the most complete statute on this subject anywhere in the country," Coffman said.

Hickenlooper signed a second measure into law in April that allows people found innocent of felony crimes after serving time in jail or prison to receive a lump sum compensation payment in lieu of annual payments. Those exonerated are eligible to receive $70,000 per year incarcerated and $25,000 per year spent on parole.

COMMENTS

More Related News

Venezuela prosecutor decries Maduro
Venezuela prosecutor decries Maduro's new congress plan
  • World
  • 2017-05-22 20:13:13Z

By Alexandra Ulmer and Maria Ramirez CARACAS/PUERTO ORDAZ, Venezuela (Reuters) - Venezuela's state prosecutor has panned unpopular President Nicolas Maduro's plan to create a grassroots congress, deepening a rare public split among the ruling Socialists as two months of massive protests show

The Supreme Court Finds North Carolina's Racial Gerrymandering Unconstitutional
The Supreme Court Finds North Carolina's Racial Gerrymandering Unconstitutional

You don't see a Kagan-Breyer-Ginsburg-Sotomayor-Thomas majority often in U.S. Supreme Court decisions, but today that quintet joined together to deal a blow to North Carolina Republicans. In the decision in Cooper v. Harris, the eight-member pre-Gorsuch roster upheld a district court's ruling that two congressional districts in North Carolina were unconstitutional racial gerrymanders, putting an end to one part of a six-year saga that began with redistricting in 2011.

U.S. Supreme Court tosses Republican-drawn North Carolina voting districts
U.S. Supreme Court tosses Republican-drawn North Carolina voting districts

By Lawrence Hurley WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ruled that Republicans in North Carolina unlawfully took race into consideration when drawing congressional district boundaries, concentrating black voters in an improper bid to diminish their overall political clout. The justices upheld a lower court's February 2016 ruling that threw out two majority-black U.S. House of Representatives districts because Republican lawmakers improperly used race as a factor when redrawing the legislative map after the 2010 census. "The North Carolina Republican legislature tried to rig congressional elections by drawing unconstitutional districts that discriminated against...

Supreme Court rejects challenge to state retroactive tax changes
Supreme Court rejects challenge to state retroactive tax changes
  • US
  • 2017-05-22 14:00:56Z

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear a challenge by several major corporations to a Michigan law that retroactively changed the way businesses are taxed in the state, leading to $1 billion extra for government coffers. The justices turned away appeals by Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co , IBM

U.S. Supreme Court leaves key campaign finance restriction in place
U.S. Supreme Court leaves key campaign finance restriction in place

By Lawrence Hurley WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday turned away a Republican challenge to a federal campaign finance restriction that prevents political parties from raising unlimited amounts of cash to spend on supporting candidates. The Republican Party of Louisiana had argued that a provision of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act violates free speech rights under the U.S. Constitution. The brief order noted that conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch favored hearing the case.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *

Cancel reply

Comments

Top News: Latin America

facebook
Hit "Like"
Don't miss any important news
Thanks, you don't need to show me this anymore.