Michigan House Bill HB5392

Michigan 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/24/24
• Refer: 1/10/24
• Refer: 3/5/24
• Report Pass: 3/13/24
• Engrossed: 4/18/24
• Refer: 4/23/24
• Report Pass: 4/23/24
• Enrolled: 4/24/24
• Chaptered: 4/30/24
• Passed: 4/30/24

Caption

Criminal procedure: sentencing; sunset on certain costs that may be imposed upon criminal conviction; modify. Amends sec. 1k, ch. IX of 1927 PA 175 (MCL 769.1k).

Impact

The impact of HB 5392 on state laws is significant as it modifies existing standards for assessing court costs and financial penalties in the criminal justice system. The bill ensures that particular minimum costs are always applied when sentencing incarcerated individuals. This change is designed to enhance the predictability and uniformity of court procedures concerning fines and assessments. By doing so, it ultimately aims to streamline court operations and improve the accountability of the judicial process in managing financial costs related to criminal convictions.

Summary

House Bill 5392 aims to amend the laws related to criminal procedure in Michigan, specifically addressing sentencing costs imposed upon criminal convictions. The bill outlines the costs courts must impose at the time of sentencing for defendants who are found guilty or plead guilty. Notably, it establishes a framework for these costs, including minimum state costs and additional fees related to court operations, legal assistance, and other administrative expenses. The implementation of this amendment is intended to standardize procedures across courts regarding the financial responsibilities associated with criminal convictions.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 5392 appears generally supportive among lawmakers, as the bill passed with a substantial majority during voting (101-6). Proponents argue that the amendment brings clarity and consistency to how courts impose costs, which can help improve compliance and understanding among defendants. However, there may be concerns from some advocacy groups about the burden placed on defendants concerning their financial obligations stemming from court costs, especially for those unable to pay. The focus on nonpayment consequences also raises potential issues regarding fairness and access to justice.

Contention

A notable point of contention within the discussions around HB 5392 involves the stipulation that no defendant can be incarcerated solely for the nonpayment of costs unless the court determines they have the means to pay but have not made a good-faith effort to do so. This provision is likely designed to safeguard against unfair punishment of individuals who may not have the financial resources to meet their financial obligations stemming from court proceedings. While this provision seeks to balance accountability and fairness, it may still lead to debates over its enforcement and the implications of financial penalties on vulnerable populations.