State v. Lyness

"In the absence of legally sufficient evidence that the defendant has the ability to pay the amount imposed, it is plain error for a trial court to require a defendant to pay court-appointed attorney fees." State v. Mendoza, 286 Or App 548, 549, 401 P3d 288 (2017) (citing State v. Coverstone, 260 Or App 714, 716, 320 P3d 670 (2014)).

Defendant appealed a judgment of conviction for second-degree robbery.  Defendant assigned error to the court's imposition of attorney fees asking, acknowledging that he did not object when the court informed him that it would impose fees.  Defendant argued that his ability to pay the imposed fee was too speculative and little evidence in the record existed about his work history.  The State argued that testimony by a probation officer about defendant's work history and a court finding that defendant could work in prison would be enough to support a finding that defendant could pay the fee.  "In the absence of legally sufficient evidence that the defendant has the ability to pay the amount imposed, it is plain error for a trial court to require a defendant to pay court-appointed attorney fees." State v. Mendoza, 286 Or App 548, 549, 401 P3d 288 (2017) (citing State v. Coverstone, 260 Or App 714, 716, 320 P3d 670 (2014)).The Court held that the trial court's assessment of the ability to pay was incorrect because the determination that defendant could pay based on his ability to work while in prison was too speculative.  Portion of judgment requiring defendant to pay attorney fees reversed; otherwise affirmed.