Filter Results

11.4.5.1 State Exemptions Overview

CategoriesCart
Highlight Updates
  1. Collection Actions
  2. Chapters
  3. Chapter 11 Criminal Justice Debt
  4. 11.4 Exemption Law and Criminal Justice Debt
  5. 11.4.5 State Exemptions Applicable to State and Municipal Criminal Justice Debt
  6. 11.4.5.1 State Exemptions Overview

11.4.5.1 State Exemptions Overview

The application of state exemptions to criminal justice debt varies from state to state, and application of state exemptions to criminal justice debt is often far from clear. Certain states explicitly provide that exemptions do not apply to certain criminal justice debts,224 but others provide just the opposite.225 Some states simply say that a criminal justice debt shall be collected as a civil judgment, without further specifying the availability of exemptions.226 Other states provide a different, more limited, set of exemptions for criminal justice debt.227 Harvard Law School’s Criminal Justice Debt Reform Builder website collects state criminal justice debt laws, which are organized into four reform areas—ability to pay, conflicts of interest, poverty penalties and poverty traps, and transparency.228

The type of debt—fines, restitution, indigent defense fees, and so forth—often affects the analysis. Courts sometimes find fines not to be subject to state exemptions, being strictly penal.229 A statute excluding fines from state exemptions may still allow exemptions to apply to restitution, however.230 Most states are silent with respect to user fees, like indigent defense fees231 and incarceration costs.232 In the many states where the exemption statutes are silent on these debts, it should be possible to argue that, in the absence of a specific exemption, user fees must be treated like any other debt. In any event, constitutional concerns raised in James v. Strange suggest that user fees should be subject to exemptions in the same manner as claims arising from private debts.233

The debtor’s supervision status—probation, parole, work release, and so forth—may affect exemptions. One state court held that workers’ compensation paid to an individual on work release was not subject to protection under state law because a separate statute requiring those on work release to pay a percentage of their earnings towards incarceration costs preempted the exemption for workers’ compensation.234 State wage garnishment protections may not apply to fines owed by inmates or to remuneration paid to an inmate for prison labor.235 Under some statutes, the availability of exemptions depends on the length of the defendant’s sentence.236

States often have a panoply of collection mechanisms—such as administrative garnishment and set-off of state benefits—that serve as an alternative to enforcement procedures for criminal justice debt.237 In some states, these non-judicial collection mechanisms are available for collection of any type of debt owed to the state, not just criminal justice debt.238 These non-judicial collection statutes may include their own set of exemptions.

Footnotes

  • 224 See, e.g., Haw. Rev. Stat. § 651-122; Iowa Code § 909.6 (fines); Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2407 (anyone sentenced to fewer than two years of incarceration has no debtor’s exemptions in regard to fines, costs, and forfeited recognizances); N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1C-1601(e) (exemptions do not apply to appearance bonds, criminal justice debt liens, and restitution); 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8127(a)(5); State v. Allen, 71 Ala. 543 (Ala. 1873); Newburn v. RFB Petroleum, Inc., 775 P.2d 93 (Colo. App. 1989) (exemptions do not apply to collection of fines).

  • 225 See, e.g., Fla. Stat. § 938.30(5); Betterton v. O’Dwyer, 101 S.W. 628 (Mo. Ct. App. 1907); State v. Threatt, 108 Ohio St. 3d 277 (Ohio 2006); State v. White, 817 N.E.2d 393 (Ohio 2004).

  • 226 See, e.g., Del. Code Ann. tit. 10, § 8603; Ga. Code Ann. §§ 17-14-13 to 17-14-19; Iowa Code § 910.7A; Or. Rev. Stat. § 137.450. See also State v. Kloeker, 73 N.E.3d 1167 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016) (vacating portion of criminal judgment compelling defendant to make monthly payments toward counsel and court fees because “an order to pay court costs is essentially a judgment on a contractual debt where the court is the creditor and the party ordered to pay court costs is the debtor” and “[a]s such, the creditor, i.e., the court, can collect only the money it is due by the methods provided for the collection of civil judgments”).

  • 227 See, e.g., Del. Code Ann. tit. 11, § 4104(c) (limiting normal wage exemptions); N.Y. Exec. Law § 632-a (McKinney) (Son of Sam Law); N.D. Cent. Code §§ 28-22-01, 28-22-15; S.D. Codified Laws § 43-45-10; Tenn. Code. Ann. § 26-2-306.

  • 228 Harvard Law School, Criminal Justice Policy Program, 50-State Criminal Justice Debt Reform Builder, available at https://cjdebtreform.org.

  • 229 Newburn v. RFB Petroleum, Inc., 775 P.2d 93 (Colo. App. 1989) (general exemptions not applicable to proceedings to collect fines). See also Enderman v. Alexander, 187 P. 729 (Colo. 1920).

  • 230 Compare Iowa Code § 909.6 (fines) (“The law relating to judgment liens, executions, and other process available to creditors for the collection of debts shall be applicable to such judgments; provided, that no law exempting the personal property of the defendant from any lien or legal process shall be applicable to such judgments.”), with Iowa Code § 910.7A (other criminal justice debt) (lacking language denying exemptions).

  • 231 Fla. Stat. § 938.29(2)(a)(4) (lien for indigent defense costs may not be foreclosed against homestead; debtor may not be denied any of the protections afforded to other civil judgment debtors); S.D. Codified Laws § 23A-40-15 (lien for indigent defense costs may not be imposed on homestead).

  • 232 Conn. Gen. Stat. § 18-85a.

  • 233 See § 11.2.3, supra.

  • 234 Gober v. Ala. Dep’t of Corr., 871 So. 2d 838 (Ala. Civ. App. 2003).

  • 235 See, e.g., Commw. of Pa. Dep’t of Corr. v. Tate, 133 A.3d 350, 358 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2016) (rejecting challenge to seizures from inmate account to collect on criminal justice debt obligations and noting that under Pennsylvania law remuneration paid to prisoners for labor does not constitute wages).

  • 236 Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-2407 (judgments for fines, costs, and forfeited recognizances; lien; exemptions; duration; no exemptions except when person sentenced for over two years). See State v. Bundy, 549 N.W.2d 122 (Neb. 1996).

  • 237 See, e.g., Cal. Gov’t Code § 12419.10 (West) (allowing tax refunds, state lottery winnings, and other state payments to be offset to repay fines, penalties, assessments, bail, vehicle parking penalties, and court-ordered reimbursements for court-related services); Utah Code Ann. § 63A-3-507 (West) (allowing administrative garnishment orders for nonpayment of criminal justice debts involving fines, surcharges, costs, interest, or restitution).

  • 238 See, e.g., Iowa Code §§ 421.17A, 421.17B.