California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Mata, F061132 (Cal. App. 2012):
restitution fine. Whatever is necessarily implied in a statute is as much a part of it as that which is expressed. [Citations.] The statute thus impliedly presumes a defendant has the ability to pay and expressly places the burden on a defendant to prove lack of ability. Where, as here, a defendant adduces no evidence of inability to pay, the trial court should presume ability to pay, as the trial court correctly did here. Since here defendant's ability to pay was supplied by the implied presumption, the record need not contain evidence of defendant's ability to pay." (People v. Romero (1996) 43 Cal.App.4th 440, 448-449.)
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.