READ FIRST TIME 02/27/14.   

     AN ACT Relating to establishing new authority for courts to assess cost recovery fees for costs associated with new indigent defense standards; amending RCW 3.62.085 and 10.01.160; reenacting and amending RCW 10.64.120; adding a new section to chapter 3.62 RCW; adding a new section to chapter 10.01 RCW; and creating new sections.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 1   The legislature finds that the state supreme court has adopted new standards and caseload limits for public defenders, which were originally scheduled to take effect in September 2013, but will not become effective until January 2015.
     The legislature finds that while these standards of four hundred misdemeanor cases per public defender per year, or weighted-system standards of three hundred misdemeanor cases per public defender per year, are intended to raise the quality of counsel provided to low-income and indigent populations, they also will have a very real fiscal impact on the criminal justice and court operations of cities and counties which already are struggling to address these costs.
     The legislature therefore intends to provide local courts and courts of limited jurisdiction with additional fee authority to assess costs on offenders that can be used to offset growing expenditures associated with indigent defense and public defender caseload limits.
     In addition, the legislature intends to review the fiscal impact the new standards and limits will have on each local court and identify appropriations to agencies of the state judicial branch for nonconstitutional functions, program, and services that could be redirected to local courts to mitigate those costs. The legislature intends through its exclusive constitutional power of appropriation to find existing resources within the agencies of the state judicial branch to remedy the detrimental impact the state supreme court's action will have on counties and cities.

Sec. 2   RCW 3.62.085 and 2005 c 457 s 10 are each amended to read as follows:
     Upon conviction or a plea of guilty in any court organized under this title or Title 35 RCW, a defendant in a criminal case is liable for a fee of ((forty-three)) fifty-five dollars. This fee shall be subject to division with the state under RCW ((3.46.120(2),)) 3.50.100(2), 3.62.020(2), 3.62.040(2), and 35.20.220(2).

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 3   A new section is added to chapter 3.62 RCW to read as follows:
     Funds deposited into the city or county general fund attributable to the increase in fees imposed by section 2, chapter . . ., Laws of 2014 (this act) must be used to support contracts, programs, and personnel specifically associated with indigent defense.

Sec. 4   RCW 10.01.160 and 2010 c 54 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
     (1) The court may require a defendant to pay costs. Costs may be imposed only upon a convicted defendant, except for costs imposed upon a defendant's entry into a deferred prosecution program, costs imposed upon a defendant for pretrial supervision, or costs imposed upon a defendant for preparing and serving a warrant for failure to appear.
     (2) Costs shall be limited to expenses specially incurred by the state in prosecuting the defendant or in administering the deferred prosecution program under chapter 10.05 RCW or pretrial supervision. They cannot include expenses inherent in providing a constitutionally guaranteed jury trial or expenditures in connection with the maintenance and operation of government agencies that must be made by the public irrespective of specific violations of law. Expenses incurred for serving of warrants for failure to appear and jury fees under RCW 10.46.190 may be included in costs the court may require a defendant to pay. Costs for administering a deferred prosecution may not exceed two hundred fifty dollars. Costs for administering a pretrial supervision may not exceed one hundred fifty dollars. Costs for preparing and serving a warrant for failure to appear may not exceed one hundred seventy-five dollars. Costs of incarceration imposed on a defendant convicted of a misdemeanor or a gross misdemeanor may not exceed the actual cost of incarceration. In no case may the court require the offender to pay more than one hundred dollars per day for the cost of incarceration. Payment of other court-ordered financial obligations, including all legal financial obligations and costs of supervision take precedence over the payment of the cost of incarceration ordered by the court. All funds received from defendants for the cost of incarceration in the county or city jail must be remitted for criminal justice purposes to the county or city that is responsible for the defendant's jail costs. Costs imposed constitute a judgment against a defendant and survive a dismissal of the underlying action against the defendant. However, if the defendant is acquitted on the underlying action, the costs for preparing and serving a warrant for failure to appear do not survive the acquittal, and the judgment that such costs would otherwise constitute shall be vacated.
     (3) The court shall not order a defendant to pay costs unless the defendant is or will be able to pay them. In determining the amount and method of payment of costs, the court shall take account of the financial resources of the defendant and the nature of the burden that payment of costs will impose.
     (4) A defendant who has been ordered to pay costs and who is not in contumacious default in the payment thereof may at any time petition the sentencing court for remission of the payment of costs or of any unpaid portion thereof. If it appears to the satisfaction of the court that payment of the amount due will impose manifest hardship on the defendant or the defendant's immediate family, the court may remit all or part of the amount due in costs, or modify the method of payment under RCW 10.01.170.
     (5) Except for direct costs relating to evaluating and reporting to the court, prosecutor, or defense counsel regarding a defendant's competency to stand trial as provided in RCW 10.77.060, this section shall not apply to costs related to medical or mental health treatment or services a defendant receives while in custody of the secretary of the department of social and health services or other governmental units. This section shall not prevent the secretary of the department of social and health services or other governmental units from imposing liability and seeking reimbursement from a defendant committed to an appropriate facility as provided in RCW 10.77.084 while criminal proceedings are stayed. This section shall also not prevent governmental units from imposing liability on defendants for costs related to providing medical or mental health treatment while the defendant is in the governmental unit's custody. Medical or mental health treatment and services a defendant receives at a state hospital or other facility are not a cost of prosecution and shall be recoverable under RCW 10.77.250 and 70.48.130, chapter 43.20B RCW, and any other applicable statute.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 5   A new section is added to chapter 10.01 RCW to read as follows:
     Funds collected as a result of the increase in the amount of costs that may be imposed by section 4, chapter . . ., Laws of 2014 (this act) must be used to support contracts, programs, and personnel specifically associated with indigent defense.

Sec. 6   RCW 10.64.120 and 2005 c 400 s 7 and 2005 c 282 s 22 are each reenacted and amended to read as follows:
     (1) Every judge of a court of limited jurisdiction shall have the authority to levy upon a person a monthly assessment not to exceed one hundred fifty dollars for services provided whenever the person is referred by the court to the misdemeanant probation department for evaluation or supervision services. The assessment may also be made by a judge in superior court when such misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor cases are heard in the superior court.
     (2) For the purposes of this section the administrative office of the courts shall define a probation department and adopt rules for the qualifications of probation officers based on occupational and educational requirements developed by an oversight committee. This oversight committee shall include a representative from the district and municipal court judges' association, the misdemeanant corrections association, the administrative office of the courts, and associations of cities and counties. The oversight committee shall consider qualifications that provide the training and education necessary to (a) conduct presentencing and postsentencing background investigations, including sentencing recommendations to the court regarding jail terms, alternatives to incarceration, and conditions of release; and (b) provide ongoing supervision and assessment of offenders' needs and the risk they pose to the community.
     (3) It shall be the responsibility of the probation services office to implement local procedures approved by the court of limited jurisdiction to ensure collection and payment of such fees into the general fund of the city or county treasury.
     (4)(a) Except as provided in (b) of this subsection, revenues raised under this section shall be used to fund programs for probation services and shall be in addition to those funds provided in RCW 3.62.050.
     (b) Revenues raised as a result of the increase in the amount of the assessment that may be imposed by section 6, chapter . . ., Laws of 2014 (this act) must be used to support contracts, programs, and personnel specifically associated with indigent defense.
     (5) Assessments and fees levied upon a probationer under this section must be suspended while the probationer is being supervised by another state under RCW 9.94A.745, the interstate compact for adult offender supervision.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 7   The administrative office of the courts must conduct an analysis to determine the increased cost and fiscal impact of the state supreme court's new standards and caseload limits for public defenders will have on county and city criminal justice system and court operations. The analysis must be disaggregated and identify costs for each county and city within the state. The office may consult with representatives of counties and cities, judges, prosecutors, and public defenders in conducting its analysis. The analysis must be provided to the appropriate committees of the legislature by December 1, 2014.
     The administrative office of the courts must also provide the legislature with a report identifying by program the amount of biennial expenditures for functions and services provided by the agencies of the state judicial branch that are not required under the federal or state Constitution. The report must describe the purpose and beneficiaries of each nonconstitutional program. Funding that is distributed by formula or by grant must be disaggregated and reported by recipient. For purposes of this section, agencies of the state judicial branch include the supreme court, appellate courts, administrative office of the courts, and office of public defense. The report must be provided to the appropriate committees of the legislature by December 1, 2014.