Bill would reduce fees associated with convictions in Oklahoma courts

Senate Bill 1458, by Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Roger Thompson, R-Okemah, passed the Senate last week and now heads to the House for consideration.

Thompson said the fees would be made up through the appropriations process rather than have the offender pay them.

“We are not cutting state agencies,” Thompson said. “We are funding it. We are just going to take it off the backs of the people.”

Jari Askins, administrative director of the courts, said a number of assessed fees go to executive branch agencies for specific programs or to help with the operation of the agency.

During economic downturns, the totals amounted to something many offenders couldn’t pay, she said.

In 1992, voters passed State Question 640, which required a supermajority in both legislative chambers to raise taxes. Otherwise, a tax increase would have to be approved in a vote of the people.

For years afterward, lawmakers added and raised fees to help state government operations because it was too hard to raise taxes, Askins said.

Charlie Hannema, a spokesman for Gov. Kevin Stitt, said the issue was an agenda item for Stitt.

“Changes like this are possible because of Governor Stitt’s leadership and work with the Legislature to remain fiscally conservative and build the largest savings account in state history at more than $2.3 billion,” Hannema said in a statement.

Stitt believes that Oklahomans should not be required to pay fees that have nothing to do with the crimes they committed, Hannema said.

“If these programs are still worthy of funding, the governor believes they should be appropriated by the Legislature instead of funded in perpetuity by fees assessed on defendants,” Hannema said.

Bob Wyatt, president of the Oklahoma Criminal Defense Lawyers Association, said some offenders coming out of prison face hundreds or thousands of dollars in fees they can’t pay.

Because they have felony convictions and are not preferred employee candidates, it is more difficult to find jobs and pay the fees, he said.

In addition, many have families and are required to make child support payments, some of which might already be in arrears, Wyatt said.

He said the inability to pay fees probably affects 50% of those coming out of prison. Some wind up back behind bars because they can’t pay, he said.

“When you look at all of these fees, you are often shocked,” he said. “How is this related to the crime charged?”

The Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs Control receives fees for forensic science and drug education.

The Oklahoma Department of Corrections receives fees for community sentencing.

The Attorney General’s Office receives fees for victims’ services.

The Oklahoma Department of Health receives fees for trauma care.

The Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services receives fees for drug abuse education and treatment.

“We pulled a list of the fees paid by criminal defendants and highlighted those that go to executive branch agencies,” Hannema said. “Those are the ones that were included in this legislation.”

Hannema said it is important to note that the measure does not reduce fines, which are part of the punishment, or the ability to award a victim restitution.

“I think it is a serious problem statewide and has been for a number of years,” said Oklahoma County Public Defender Bob Ravitz.

Some who can’t pay return to criminal acts, he said.

Some who can’t pay quit seeing their probation officers and participating in programs on which their release is conditioned, Ravitz said.

“This has been a tremendous problem for at least 20 years in this state, and it needs to be rectified,” Ravitz said.

Tulsa County Public Defender Corbin Brewster could not be reached for comment.

In 2010, the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled that three fees attached to civil-case filings were invalid because they didn’t go toward funding the court system.

The high court nullified a $10 fee that funded child-abuse investigations, a $20 fee that funded adoption registries and a $3 fee that funded victims’ services.

Access to the court is violated if those seeking to litigate have to pay for unrelated programs, the justices said.