U.S. high court says Colorado must refund exonerated defendants




  • In US
  • 2017-04-19 17:29:28Z
  • By By Andrew Chung

By Andrew Chung

(Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down a Colorado law that allowed the state to keep fees and restitution paid by criminal defendants even when their convictions are overturned, calling it an unconstitutional violation of their rights.

The court sided with two people whose sexual assault convictions were thrown out. The justices ruled 7-1 that a 2013 Colorado law called the Exoneration Act, which forced cleared defendants to prove their innocence in a subsequent lawsuit before getting back money paid to the state after conviction, violated the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of due process.

Writing for the court, liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg criticized the Colorado policy of keeping exonerated defendants' money because at that point they are once again presumed to be innocent.

"Colorado may not presume a person, adjudged guilty of no crime, nonetheless guilty enough for monetary exactions," Ginsburg wrote.

Shortly after January oral arguments in the case, Colorado officials proposed a bill in the state legislature to fall in line with other states and make it easier to recoup conviction-related penalties. The bill passed last month and takes effect in September.

The case involved two convicted defendants who were later exonerated. Shannon Nelson was found guilty in 2006 in Arapahoe County of incest and abuse of her four children. She was given a 20-year prison sentence and ordered to pay more than $8,100 in court costs, fees and restitution.

Her conviction was overturned due to trial error, and she was acquitted after a retrial. Nelson's brother and his wife meanwhile were convicted of sexually assaulting the children.

Louis Alonzo Madden was convicted in La Plata County in 2005 after he allegedly propositioned a 14-year-old girl who was a passenger on the trolley he was driving, then pinned her against a window and sexually assaulted her, according to court papers. He was given prison time and more than $4,400 in related fees and restitution. His convictions were later set aside.

Both defendants' bids to get back money they had paid failed in 2015 when the Colorado Supreme Court said it could authorize repayment only if they sued under the Exoneration Act, which was meant to compensate the wrongfully convicted.

They appealed, and the U.S. Supreme Court rejected Colorado's argument that the funds belonged to the state because the convictions were in place when the funds were taken. Conservative Justice Clarence Thomas was the lone dissenter.

Only eight of the nine justices took part in the ruling because the case was argued before Justice Neil Gorsuch joined the court on April 10.



(Reporting by Andrew Chung in New York; Editing by Will Dunham)

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: US

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