California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Pekari, A154658 (Cal. App. 2020):
"[A] defendant may lack the 'ability to pay' the costs of court-appointed counsel yet have the 'ability to pay' a restitution fine" or other fees imposed by the trial court. (People v. Douglas (1995) 39 Cal.App.4th 1385, 1397.) " Ability to pay does not necessarily require existing employment or cash on hand.' [Citation.] '[I]n determining whether a defendant has the ability to pay a restitution fine, the court is not limited to considering a defendant's
Page 10
present ability but may consider a defendant's ability to pay in the future.' [Citation.] This include[s] the defendant's ability to obtain prison wages and to earn money after his release from custody." (People v. Hennessey (1995) 37 Cal.App.4th 1830, 1837; see also People v. Staley (1992) 10 Cal.App.4th 782, 783 [when the trial court considers ability to pay fines or fees, its determination may be made based on the person's ability to earn where he or she has no physical, mental or emotional impediment which precludes the person from finding and maintaining employment once his or her sentence is completed].)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.