Supreme Court of the United States
Fuller v. Oregon
May 20, 1974417 U.S. 40
Summary
The Supreme Court affirmed the Oregon Court of Appeals, holding that Oregon's statute requiring indigent defendants who later become able to pay to reimburse the State for counsel costs does not violate the Equal Protection or Due Process Clauses. The Court reasoned the statute is narrowly tailored, applies only to convicted defendants who can pay, provides exemptions, and therefore is constitutionally permissible.
Holding
- Whether Oregon's recoupment statute that conditions probation on repayment of counsel costs by indigent defendants who later become able to pay violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.. The statute does not violate the Equal Protection Clause and is constitutionally permissible.
Docket 73-5280
Cited authorities
- Kan. Stat. Ann. § 22-4513
- 67 Mich. L. Rev. 1404
- 59 Geo. L.J. 991
Cited by
- Joshua London v. the State of Texas
- State of Vermont v. Seth Morgan
- John Kent Mathis, Appellant v. the State of Texas
- State v. Kennon N. Harris
- United States of America, Appellee v. Victor Santarpio, A/k/a "lefty”, Defendant, Appellant
- State of Maine v. Timothy S. Smith
- Dunomes v. Winter
- James Thomas and David Hixson v. Bill Haslam