State v. Kasper

A court may not impose attorney fees without announcing them in the presence of a criminal defendant; an imprisoned criminal defendant does not more disadvantaged than those similarly situated when he is denied the ability to credit time already served to a new sentence.

Defendant convicted of a felony and sentenced to 18 months of probation. Defendant later violated multiple conditions of his probation, and admitted so at a hearing. The trial court found that Defendant violation his probation, and observed that Defendant was serving parole sanctions for another case at the time of the hearing, and that these sanctions were almost finished. At the hearing, the trial court stated it would impose “60 days with one-year post-prison supervision (PPS).” The trial court refused to credit Defendant with time already served. Defendant argued that the denial violated equal protection principles because he did not have the funds to bail himself out of jail before the probation revocation hearing. The trial court rejected this argument, as he would have been unable to bail out anyway. The trial court did not mention attorney fees on the record. The trial court revoked Defendant’s probation, sentenced him to 60 days of jail and 12 months of PPS, and ordered payment of $210 in attorney fees. Defendant appealed, challenging the assignment of attorney fees and the denial for credit for time served toward the 60-day jail term. The Oregon Court of Appeals held that the attorney fees could not be imposed without announcing them in his presence, and that Defendant was not disadvantaged by the rest of his sentence any more than a similarly situated jailed person. Judgment requiring payment of attorney fees reversed; otherwise affirmed.