Justices skeptical over state’s refusal to refund court fees

WASHINGTON — A law professor urged the Supreme Court on Monday to rule that the Constitution requires the government to refund fines and fees paid by people whose criminal convictions are reversed.

People who are freed are “entitled to get their money back,” UCLA professor Stuart Banner told the court. It is, he said, a matter of common sense and long legal tradition. In his legal brief, he called it a “proposition almost too obvious to need stating.”

But it has not always been a winner in state courts.

Banner and UCLA’s Supreme Court Clinic appealed on behalf of Shannon Nelson, a Colorado woman who paid $702 in fees and restitution after she was convicted of abusing her children. But when her conviction was reversed and she was acquitted in a retrial, Colorado officials refused to refund the money.

During Monday’s argument, most of the justices voiced skepticism over Colorado’s claim that it may keep money taken from defendants who have been exonerated.

“Whose money is it?” Justice Elena Kagan asked Colorado Solicitor General Frederick Yarger.

“This is the state’s money,” he said. “It is property obtained pursuant to a conviction.”

The other justices sounded surprised at the state lawyer’s unyielding claim. Chief Justice John Roberts wondered if the state could impose a $10,000 fine on every person who was convicted of a crime and keep the money if the convictions were later reversed. Yes, Yarger said. While the eight justices have often sounded evenly split in recent months, they sounded in agreement Monday. The court will hand down an opinion in the case in a month or two.