State v. James Ellis
Washington Supreme Court held restitution imposed on an indigent defendant did not violate the state or federal excessive fines clause, finding the amount, which represented a portion of the victim’s funeral expenses, to be purely compensatory, not punitive. The court declined to interpret the state clause as more protective than the federal version and did not directly address the defendant and amicus groups’ arguments that restitution is punishment subject to the clauses when imposed on indigent defendants and grossly disproportionate when a defendant’s ability to pay is not taken into account.
Related Commentary
Fines, Fees, and Bail in State Courts
Recent state supreme court cases, including a major California ruling last week, address the burden of court-imposed financial obligations on criminal defendants.
State Court Oral Arguments to Watch for in June
Issues on the dockets include partisan gerrymandering, fines and fees imposed on indigent defendants, and bans on flavored tobacco and online vision tests.