Judges: WILLIAM L. WEBSTER
Filed Date: 3/9/1988
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 7/5/2016
Dear Mr. Perry:
This opinion is in response to your questions asking:
1. Whether Section
559.021 , RSMo 1986 prohibits a Circuit Court Judge from ordering as a condition of probation a defendant to make payment to a county fund of a sum of money to be used for law enforcement purposes.2. Whether a county commission in a second class county has the authority to create a fund in the county treasury to receive such money and expend the money for law enforcement purposes only.
We have received Section
559.021 . Conditions of probation — compensation of victims — free work, public or charitable.
* * *
2. In addition to such other authority as exists to order conditions of probation, the court may order such conditions as the court believes will serve to compensate the victim, any dependent of the victim, or society. Such conditions may include, but shall not be limited to
(1) Restitution to the victim or any dependent of the victim, in an amount to be determined by the judge; and
(2) The performance of a designated amount of free work for a public or charitable purpose, or purposes, as determined by the judge.
(Emphasis added.)
This statute sets forth some of the conditions which may be imposed by the circuit court judge but it does not negate other possibilities. In fact, this provision contains expansive language granting the circuit court judge broad discretion to tailor conditions of probation. In addition to the broad grant of discretion, statutes providing for suspension of sentence and probation are considered remedial and have been liberally construed by some courts. Mever v. Missouri Real Estate Commission,
There are, however, some limitations on conditions of probation. When an accused is placed on probation his liberty is subject to all conditions attached to that release which are not illegal, immoral or impossible to perform. State v.Brantley,
In regard to the second question concerning the creation of a fund in the county treasury, Section
Conclusion
It is the opinion of this office that (1) Section
Very truly yours,
WILLIAM L. WEBSTER Attorney General
James L. Fiore, Jr. v. United States , 696 F.2d 205 ( 1982 )
United States v. Vito M. Pastore , 537 F.2d 675 ( 1976 )
Matter of Storie , 574 S.W.2d 369 ( 1978 )
State v. Brantley , 353 S.W.2d 793 ( 1962 )
Reeves v. United States , 35 F.2d 323 ( 1929 )
Meyer v. Missouri Real Estate Commission , 238 Mo. App. 476 ( 1944 )
Black v. Romano , 105 S. Ct. 2254 ( 1985 )