NCJ Number
117406
Date Published
Unknown
Length
15 pages
Annotation
Various State and local courts have introduced methods of fine collection and enforcement that have resulted in a high proportion of fines being paid.
Abstract
Proponents of fines note that they can be matched to the offender's situation and do not destroy the offender's economic and social ties to the community. Critics argue that fines cannot be collected and that they add to the courts' administrative burdens. Barriers to effective collection of fines include the low priority that law enforcement agencies give to warrants for the arrest of delinquent payers and the use by other agencies of the funds collected by the courts. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of the judiciary in collecting fines has important implications for the fine as a sanction and for the court as an institution. If payments are not enforced, offenders may believe that they can commit other crimes and that nothing will happen to them. In imposing fines, judges should recognize that the amount of the fine and the manner in which it is imposed affect its potential for collection. In addition, judges need information about the offender's family status, income, employment, and assets. At the time of sentencing, judges must also recognize their crucial role in communicating to the offender the sanction being imposed. Innovative methods that courts are now using for collecting fines include installment payments, credit cards, computerized recordkeeping systems, the use of private telemarketing firms, and the use of collection agencies. Footnotes.