The Administrative Office of the Courts has issued a new form, AOC-CR-415, through which a person can make a motion for relief from costs, fines, and other monetary obligations. The form also doubles as the order through which a judge can rule on the motion.
In State v. Rieger, ___ N.C. App. ___, 833 S.E.2d 699 (2019), the Court of Appeals held that court costs should be assessed only once for all related charges that are adjudicated together. I wrote about the case here. Today’s post looks at how the appellate courts have applied Rieger since it was decided last October.
In today’s post I’m sharing two draft forms with which a defendant might gather information about his or her financial situation and, based on that situation, request relief from various monetary obligations, including costs, fines, and restitution.
When a defendant has multiple charges adjudicated together in the same hearing or trial, and those charges arose from the same underlying event or transaction, the court should assess costs only once. That’s the new rule according to State v. Rieger, a case recently decided by the court of appeals.
The Administrative Office of the Courts has issued its most recent report on cost waivers to the General Assembly. This report covers the first full year of cost waiver data since the General Assembly’s amendment of G.S. 7A-304(a), requiring written notice and an opportunity to be heard for any government entity directly affected by a waiver. Let’s see if that change had an impact on waiver practices.
The School of Government has published a new resource on Monetary Obligations in North Carolina Criminal Cases.
Today’s post considers when a court should—and sometimes must—evaluate a defendant’s ability to pay a monetary obligation in a criminal case.