State v. Thomas

A trial court properly orders a defendant to pay attorney fees “where the defendant himself has posted a security deposit subject to the express condition that the monies could be used to satisfy the defendant’s financial obligations.” State v. Twitty, 85 Or App 98, 106, 735 P2d 1252, rev den, 304 Or 56 (1987).

Defendant appealed a conviction for three counts of unlawful sexual penetration in the first degree. Defendant assigned error to the trial court’s determination of a mandatory 300-month sentence for each count conviction, and Defendant’s requirement to pay $1,600 towards the cost of court-appointed counsel. On appeal, Defendant argued the mandatory sentence imposed on him was unconstitutionally disproportionate in violation of Article I, section 16, and the Eighth Amendment. Additionally, Defendant argued the trial court did not make the statutorily required findings to determine he has funds available to pay the $1,600 cost. In response, the State argued Defendant’s constitutional argument failed due to binding precedent, and that case law authorized the trial court to find a defendant has funds available to pay court fees when there are security deposit funds available that were posted with conditional language. A trial court properly orders a defendant to pay attorney fees “where the defendant himself has posted a security deposit subject to the express condition that the monies could be used to satisfy the defendant’s financial obligations.” State v. Twitty, 85 Or App 98, 106, 735 P2d 1252, rev den, 304 Or 56 (1987). The court concluded the trial court did not err in determining Defendant’s sentencing or the requirement to pay $1,600 in court-appointed counsel costs but did err in imposing the $107 in “Mandatory State Amt.” because Defendant was not given the opportunity to object to it. Judgment requiring Defendant to pay a $107 “Mandatory State Amt.” reversed; otherwise affirmed.