Texas APPLESEED George Butts, Chair George Butts Law* Elizabeth Mack, Chair-elect Locke Lord LLP* Allene D. Evans, Immediate Past Chair The University of Texas System* Neel Lane, Secretary-Treasurer Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP* Hon. Marilyn Aboussie San Angelo E. Leon Carter Carter Scholer Arnett Hamada & Mockler, PLLC* Ricardo G. Cedillo Davis, Cedillo & Mendoza, Inc.* Clinton Cross El Paso* Dennis P. Duffy BakerHostetler* Edward F. Fernandes Hunton & Williams LLP* N. Scott Fletcher Jones Day* R. James George, Jr. George Brothers Kincaid & Horton L.L.P.* Mark K. Glasser Sidley Austin LLP* Sean Gorman Bracewell & Giuliani LLP* Marcy Hogan Greer Alexander Dubose Jefferson & Townsend LLP* Gregory Huffman Thompson & Knight LLP* Tommy Jacks Fish & Richardson P.C.* Susan Karamanian George Washington University Law School* Charles Kelley Mayer Brown LLP*                                     Layne Kruse Norton Rose Fulbright* October  23,  2015     Sent  via  Email  &  Priority  Mail   City  Rep.  Peter  Svarzbein   300  N.  Campbell     El  Paso,  Texas  79901   district1@elpasotexas.gov     City  Rep.  Larry  E.  Romero   300  N.  Campbell   El  Paso,  Texas  79901   district2@elpasotexas.gov     City  Rep.  Emma  Acosta   300  N.  Campbell                                       El  Paso,  Texas  79901     district3@elpasotexas.gov     City  Rep.  Carl  L.  Robinson   300  N.  Campbell   El  Paso,  Texas  79901   district4@elpasotexas.gov     City  Rep.  Dr.  Michiel  Noe   300  N.  Campbell   El  Paso,  Texas  79901   district5@elpasotexas.gov     City  Rep.  Claudia  Ordaz   300  N.  Campbell   El  Paso,  Texas  79901   district6@elpasotexas.gov     City  Rep.  Lily  Limón   300  N.  Campbell   El  Paso,  Texas  79901   district7@elpasotexas.gov     City  Rep.  Cortney  Niland   300  N.  Campbell   El  Paso,  Texas  79901   district8@elpasotexas.gov RE:  City  of  El  Paso  Debtors’  Prisons     Thomas Leatherbury Vinson & Elkins LLP* Michael Lowenberg Gardere Wynne Sewell LLP* Edmundo O. Ramirez Ellis, Koeneke & Ramirez, L.L.P.* Michael Rodriguez Atlas, Hall & Rodriguez LLP* David Sharp Gunderson Sharp, LLP* Courtney Stewart DLA Piper LLP (US)* Allan Van Fleet McDermott Will & Emery LLP* Pat Villareal Jones Day* Dr. Gregory Vincent The University of Texas at Austin*   Mark Wawro Susman Godfrey L.L.P.* Angela C. Zambrano Sidley Austin LLP* J. Chrys Dougherty III, Chair Emeritus (1915-2014) Dear  Members  of  the  El  Paso  City  Council:   As  organizations  dedicated  to  protecting  the  constitutional  and  civil   rights  of  all  Texans,  we  urge  you  to  ensure  that  the  El  Paso  Municipal   Court  modifies  its  policies  and  practices  with  respect  to  the  collection  of   fines  and  court  costs.  The  City  must  implement  new  Municipal  Court   procedures  to  end  the  repeated  violations  of  state  and  federal  law  and  to   treat  lower-­‐‑income  El  Pasoans  with  fairness.           * affiliations listed for identification only 1609 Shoal Creek Blvd., STE 201 Austin, TX 78701 Phone 512.473.2800 Fax 512.473.2813 www.texasappleseed.net info@texasappleseed.net 1 As  you  are  aware,  the  online  news  outlet  Buzzfeed  recently  published  the  results  of  its   investigation  into  Texas  municipal  courts  jailing  people  who  are  too  poor  to  pay  fines   and  court  costs  for  petty  misdemeanors,  with  a  special  focus  on  the  El  Paso  Municipal   Court.1  Their  investigation  revealed  that  in  many  cases,  El  Paso  Municipal  Court  judges   were  failing  to  follow  well-­‐‑established  state  and  federal  law.    The  Texas  Code  of   Criminal  Procedure  explicitly  requires  a  municipal  court  judge  to  make  a  written   determination  that  a  person  is  not  indigent,  and  has  failed  to  make  a  good  faith  effort  to   pay  fines,  before  jailing  that  person  for  failure  to  pay  his  or  her  fines.2    Yet  the  Buzzfeed   reporters  reviewed  the  case  files  of  100  individuals  jailed  for  at  least  5  days  for   nonpayment  of  fines  by  El  Paso  Municipal  Court  judges  and  did  not  find  evidence  of  an   ability  to  pay  determination  in  any  case  file.       The  El  Paso  Municipal  Court  gives  people  who  are  too  poor  to  pay  fines  few  options   other  than  jail.  Data  from  the  Texas  Office  of  Court  Administration  show  that,  of  all   Texas  cities,  El  Paso  has  the  second-­‐‑highest  number  of  cases  in  which  fines  are  resolved   through  jail  credit,  with  38,970  fines  or  courts  costs  paid  through  jail  stays  in  FY  2014.   During  that  same  year,  fines  were  waived  for  indigency  in  only  14  cases,  and  satisfied   through  community  service  in  only  233  cases.3  With  this  lack  of  options,  failure  to  pay   fines  is  quite  common.  Data  shows  that  approximately  77,000  El  Paso  residents—more   than  11%  of  the  city’s  population—currently  have  outstanding  warrants  for  their  arrest   for  nonpayment  of  fines  or  court  costs  to  the  El  Paso  Municipal  Court.4     The  Court  also  makes  it  very  difficult  for  low-­‐‑income  defendants  to  even  enter  into  a   payment  plan,  requiring  that  an  individual  pay  25%  of  each  fine  up-­‐‑front  in  order  to   obtain  a  payment  plan,  and  requiring  complete  payment  over  the  course  of  just  90   days.5  Under  these  rules,  an  individual  who  owed  $1000  would  have  to  pay  $250  up   front,  and  $250  on  a  monthly  basis  for  three  months  to  resolve  her  fines—amounts  that   are  completely  impossible  for  many  lower-­‐‑income  individuals.     1  Kendall  Taggart  &  Alex  Campbell,  Their  Crime:  Being  Poor,  Their  Sentence:  Jail,  BUZZFEED,  Oct.  7,  2015,   available  at  http://www.buzzfeed.com/kendalltaggart/in-­‐texas-­‐its-­‐a-­‐crime-­‐to-­‐be-­‐poor#.bnmEG2Mao   (hereinafter  Taggart  &  Campbell).     2  Tex.  Code.  Crim.  Pro.  Art.  45.046(a).   3  Tx.  Ofc.  of  Court  Admin.,  Annual  Statistical  Report,  FY  2014.   4  Data  obtained  through  open  records  request  to  the  City  of  El  Paso  in  October  2015.  The  data  accounts  for   318,155  warrants,  representing  100,228  individuals,  77,076  of  whom  have  El  Paso  addresses.   5  See  El  Paso  Municipal  Court  website,  https://www.elpasotexas.gov/municipal-­‐courts/fines-­‐and-­‐payments,   last  visited  October  19,  2015  (“A  25%  initial  payment  is  required-­‐per  violation  –  prior  to  the  issuance  of  the   payment  plan.  You  will  have  90  days  to  pay  your  fine.  If  the  amount  is  not  paid  in  full  by  the  end  of  the  90  day   period,  an  arrest  commitment  will  be  issued,  and  you  may  be  denied  vehicle  registration  and  the  renewal  of   your  driver's  license.”)   1609 Shoal Creek Blvd., STE 201 Austin, TX 78701 Phone 512.473.2800 Fax 512.473.2813 www.texasappleseed.net info@texasappleseed.net 2 People  who  are  too  poor  to  pay  ultimately  wind  up  before  a  judge,  and  based  on   interviews  given  by  El  Paso  Municipal  Court  judges  to  the  Buzzfeed  reporters,  a  denial   of  these  individuals’  rights  under  state  and  federal  law  is  likely.  Two  El  Paso  Municipal   Court  judges  quoted  in  the  article  displayed  fundamental  misunderstandings  of  the   law,  claiming  that  they  were  under  no  obligation  to  ask  about  a  defendant’s  income   before  sentencing  the  defendant  to  jail.6  Along  with  the  Texas  statutory  requirement   that  judges  conduct  such  an  inquiry,  the  U.S.  Constitution  requires  that  judges  inquire   into  a  defendant’s  ability  to  pay  before  sentencing  that  defendant  to  jail  for  failure  to   pay  a  debt.  The  Supreme  Court  has  held  that  jailing  a  probationer  for  failure  to  pay  a   fine,  without  any  inquiry  into  the  reasons  for  his  nonpayment  and  ability  to  pay,   “would  be  contrary  to  the  fundamental  fairness  required  by  the  Fourteenth   Amendment.”  Bearden  v.  Georgia,  461  U.S.  660,  672-­‐‑73  (1983).  Bearden  makes  it  clear  that   the  court  has  an  affirmative  duty  to  inquire  into  ability  to  pay  before  sentencing  anyone   to  jail  for  nonpayment.    The  Supreme  Court  has  also  held  that  a  judge  cannot  impose  a   jail  term,  “even  for  a  brief  period,”  if  the  judge  failed  to  appoint  counsel  at  trial.   Argersinger  v.  Hamlin,  407  U.S.  25,  33  (1972).  To  the  best  of  our  knowledge,  counsel  is  not   appointed  to  any  individual  facing  jail  time  for  unpaid  fines  in  the  El  Paso  Municipal   Court.     Jailing  people  for  unpaid  fines,  without  any  inquiry  into  their  ability  to  pay  and  without   appointing  counsel,  violates  the  Constitution  and  thereby  exposes  municipalities  to   liability  pursuant  to  42  U.S.C.  §  1983.  A  flurry  of  lawsuits  have  recently  been  filed   against  cities  across  the  United  States  based  on  such  violations,  some  of  which  have   already  resulted  in  cities  being  forced  to  dramatically  alter  their  policies  and  procedures   around  municipal  court  fine  collection.7  Other  jurisdictions,  in  response  to  research   uncovering  similar  practices,  have  voluntarily  reformed  their  debt  collection  practices.     El  Paso  must  take  steps  to  address  the  ongoing  constitutional  violations  in  its  Municipal   Court.  Aside  from  being  inhumane  and  illegal,  incarcerating  indigent  El  Pasoans  for  not   paying  fines  is  wasteful  and  counterproductive.  The  City  is  paying  an  estimated   6  See  Taggart  &  Campell  (“’There’s  no  requirement  for  us  to  ask’  defendants  if  they  have  the  money  to  pay,   said  Judge  [Cheryl]  Davis,  who  sentenced  Lane.  ‘Unless  they  bring  up  the  fact  that  they  have  no  money  to  pay,   or  that  they  would  rather  go  on  to  a  payment  plan,  or  they  want  to  do  community  service,  then  it’s  not   offered,’  she  said.  .  .  .  “El  Paso  city  court  Presiding  Judge  Daniel  Robledo  also  said  that  judges  were  under  no   obligation  to  ask  people  about  their  finances  —  the  onus  was  on  defendants  to  raise  the  issue.”)   7  See,  e.g.,  Jenkins  v.  City  of  Jennings,  4:15-­‐cv-­‐252  (E.D.  Mo.  Sep.  16,  2015)  (entering  order  for  permanent   injunction  to  overhaul  municipal  court  processes);  Cleveland  v.  City  of  Montgomery,  2:13-­‐cv-­‐732,  Watts  v.  City   of  Montgomery,  2:13-­‐cv-­‐733  &  Mitchell  v.  City  of  Montgomery,  2:14-­‐cv-­‐186  (M.D.  Ala.  Nov.  17,  2014)  (entering   injunction  enforcement  settlement  agreement  in  which  city  agreed  to  overhaul  court  processes).  See  also  Fant   v.  City  of  Ferguson,  4:15-­‐cv-­‐253  (July  13,  2015)  (order  denying  motion  to  dismiss  as  to  all  counts);  Cain  v.  City   of  New  Orleans,  2:15-­‐cv-­‐4479  (E.D.  La.  Sep.  17,  2015)  (motion  for  preliminary  injunction  pending);  Foster  v.   City  of  Alexander  3:15-­‐cv-­‐647  (M.D.  Ala.  Sep.  8,  2015)  (motion  for  preliminary  injunction  pending).   1609 Shoal Creek Blvd., STE 201 Austin, TX 78701 Phone 512.473.2800 Fax 512.473.2813 www.texasappleseed.net info@texasappleseed.net 3 $375,000  to  jail  people  for  nonpayment  of  fines8—an  amount  that  could  surely  be  better   spent.  Moreover,  El  Pasoans  who  are  already  financially  struggling  may  lose  their   employment,  lose  their  housing,  fail  to  pay  their  bills,  and  suffer  other  negative   consequences  when  they  are  arrested  and  jailed,  making  it  even  less  likely  that  they  will   be  able  to  pay  their  fines  or  contribute  to  the  tax  revenue  of  the  city  in  the  future.         We  urge  the  City  Council  to  work  with  the  Municipal  Court  to  develop  and  adopt  a   new  set  of  policies  and  practices  for  the  collection  of  fines  and  court  costs  in  the  El  Paso   Municipal  Court.  As  you  consider  this  issue,  we  offer  our  expertise  on  existing  legal   requirements  and  best  practices.  We  have  attached  a  set  of  proposed  practices,  informed   by  constitutional  principles  and  well-­‐‑established  law,  that  the  City  Council  should   consider  implementing.  This  list  is  not  intended  to  be  exhaustive,  but  a  starting  point   for  a  discussion  about  the  changes  that  must  be  made  to  remedy  the  ongoing   constitutional  violations.       Please  let  us  know  when  you  are  available  to  discuss  these  proposals  further.  In  the   meantime,  please  feel  free  to  contact  any  of  us  with  questions.       Sincerely,       Mary  Mergler   Director,  Criminal  Justice  Project,  Texas  Appleseed,  Austin,  TX   mmergler@texasappleseed.net     Ranjana  Natarajan     Director,  Civil  Rights  Clinic,  University  of  Texas  School  of  Law,  Austin,  TX   rnatarajan@law.utexas.edu     Rebecca  Robertson   Legal  and  Policy  Director,  American  Civil  Liberties  Union  of  Texas,  Houston,  TX   rrobertson@aclutx.org     Susanne  Pringle   Senior  Staff  Attorney,  Texas  Fair  Defense  Project,  Austin,  TX   springle@fairdefense.org         8  See  Taggart  &  Campbell.   1609 Shoal Creek Blvd., STE 201 Austin, TX 78701 Phone 512.473.2800 Fax 512.473.2813 www.texasappleseed.net info@texasappleseed.net 4 CC:                   Mayor  Oscar  Leeser   Mayor’s  Office     300  N.  Campbell   El  Paso,  TX  79901   mayor@elpasotexas.gov   Hon.  Daniel  Robledo   Presiding  Judge,  El  Paso  Municipal  Court   Municipal  Court   810  E.  Overland   El  Paso,  TX  79901   1609 Shoal Creek Blvd., STE 201 Austin, TX 78701 Phone 512.473.2800 Fax 512.473.2813 www.texasappleseed.net info@texasappleseed.net 5 Proposed  El  Paso  Municipal  Court  Policies  &  Practices     For  Fine  Collection       1) Provide  Defendants  with  Information  about  Their  Rights.  The  Court  should   provide  defendants  with  written  information,  explained  in  simple  terms   understandable  to  non-­‐‑lawyers,  outlining  their  rights  and  their  options  in  lieu  of   payment  of  the  total  fine.     a. If  the  case  is  filed  by  complaint  rather  than  ticket  and  a  summons  is   mailed  to  defendant,  this  information  should  be  provided  with  the   summons.     b. The  Court  should  proactively  advise  defendants  of  this  information  before   accepting  a  plea,  upon  sentencing,  and  at  any  subsequent  appearance   concerning  enforcement  or  collection.   c. For  defendants  who  pay  fines  at  the  clerk’s  window,  kiosk,  or  elsewhere   without  seeing  a  judge,  the  Court  should  clearly  post  this  information  and   provide  it  in  handout  form.  The  information  should  also  be  available  on   the  Court’s  website.       2) Hold  an  Ability  to  Pay  Hearing  Before  Setting  the  Fine  Amount.    Before  setting   the  fine  amount,  the  judge  should  ask  the  defendant  about  her  ability  to  pay.       a. The  judge  should  consider  the  defendant’s  income,  dependents,  and  other   significant  expenses.     b. The  judge  should  presume  that  a  defendant  is  entitled  to  alternative   sentencing  if  she  receives  certain  forms  of  governmental  assistance,  such   as  a  Section  8  housing  voucher,  Medicaid,  TANF  or  SNAP  food  benefits.   c. The  Court  should  provide  written  guidance  to  judges  regarding  ability  to   pay  to  ensure  that  income,  dependents  and  expenses  are  considered   appropriately.   d. The  Court  should  communicate  all  determinations  of  indigency  to  the   Texas  Department  of  Public  Safety  in  cases  that  involve  offenses  for  which   surcharges  attach,  e.g.,  driving  without  a  license,  driving  while  license  is   invalid,  and  failure  to  maintain  financial  responsibility.     3) Assess  Alternative  Sentences.    After  determining  defendant’s  income,  the   sentencing  judge  should  offer  specific  alternative  sentences  for  all  defendants   under  a  certain  income  level.   a. The  Court  should  provide  written  guidance  to  judges  regarding  waiver  of   fines,  reduction  of  fines  and  alternative  sentencing,  based  on  ability  to   pay,  and  include  guidelines  according  to  household  income  and  size,  and   the  income  level  required  for  El  Paso  residents  to  meet  their  basic  needs.     1609 Shoal Creek Blvd., STE 201 Austin, TX 78701 Phone 512.473.2800 Fax 512.473.2813 www.texasappleseed.net info@texasappleseed.net 6   b. The  judge  should  reduce  fines  to  be  proportionate  to  each  defendant’s   financial  resources.     c. The  judge  should  waive  court  costs  and  fees  as  appropriate,  based  on   defendant’s  circumstances  and  ability  to  pay.  The  Court’s  written   guidance  on  ability  to  pay  should  include  guidance  on  when  such  a   waiver  is  appropriate.   d. The  judge  should  offer  community  service  in  lieu  of  fines  for  a  number  of   hours  that  defendant  can  reasonably  complete  given  her  employment,   childcare  obligations,  transportation,  disability,  and  any  other  factors   substantially  impairing  her  ability  to  perform  community  service.  Before   ordering  community  service,  the  judge  should  inquire  into  the   defendant’s  ability  to  complete  community  service  without  undue   hardship.     e. In  order  to  make  community  service  possible  for  individuals  to  complete,   limits  should  be  set  on  the  amount  of  community  service  that  an   individual  can  be  required  to  complete.  These  limits  should  include  a   maximum  total  number  of  community  hours,  a  maximum  number  of   community  service  hours  per  week  or  month  (e.g.,  8  hours  per  week  or  24   hours  per  month),  and  a  maximum  period  for  which  the  community   service  requirements  can  endure.     f. The  judge  should  offer  payment  plans  in  lieu  of  immediate  payment  of   total  fines  to  persons  who  lack  an  ability  to  pay  the  full  fine  at  that  time.   No  amount  should  be  required  to  be  immediately  payable  in  order  to   enter  into  a  payment  plan,  nor  should  any  additional  amount  be  assessed   as  a  penalty  for  entering  into  a  payment  plan,  even  if  that  amount  is   authorized  by  law.  Payment  plan  amounts  should  be  low  enough  so  that   defendant  can  still  meet  all  basic  needs  in  addition  to  paying  the  monthly   installments.  The  Court  should  set  a  cap  on  monthly  payment  plan   amounts  based  on  household  income  and  size.   4) Make  Compliance  Simpler.    The  Court  should  take  steps  to  help  people  comply   with  its  orders  and  avoid  arrest  and  jail  time.   a. The  Court  should  implement  basic  steps,  like  automatic  phone  calls  or  text   messages,  to  remind  defendants  of  their  court  dates.     b. The  Court  should  allow  defendants  to  reschedule  court  appearances  when   necessary  and  to  appear  telephonically  when  possible.   c. The  City  should  implement  a  program,  pursuant  to  Texas  Code  of   criminal  Procedure  §  103.0025,  enacted  by  the  84th  legislature,  that  allows   individuals  who  are  arrested  to  pay  outstanding  fines  by  credit  card  or   debit  card  to  avoid  being  booked  at  the  jail.  Individuals  should  not  be   1609 Shoal Creek Blvd., STE 201 Austin, TX 78701 Phone 512.473.2800 Fax 512.473.2813 www.texasappleseed.net info@texasappleseed.net 7 booked  if  they  pay  a  small  percentage,  e.g.,  no  more  than  10%,  of  the   outstanding  fines.   d. The  cases  of  persons  with  a  known  inability  to  pay  should  not  be  sent  to   private  collection  agencies  or  law  firms  for  collection.  Before  sending   debts  to  private  collection  agencies  or  law  firms,  the  Court  should  make  a   finding  of  willful  failure  to  pay.  Any  fee  added  to  a  debt  sent  to  collection   (customarily  30%  of  the  debt)  should  be  automatically  waived  if  a  person   is  later  determined  to  be  indigent.           5) Issue  Fewer  Warrants.    The  Court  should  reduce  its  reliance  on  arrest  warrants,   and  limit  the  issuance  of  warrants  to  situations  in  which  the  Court  is  aware  that   the  failure  to  pay  or  comply  is  willful.     a. If  a  defendant  fails  to  appear  in  municipal  court  once,  the  Court  should   issue  a  summons  for  a  new  court  date,  rather  than  an  arrest  warrant  and   an  additional  criminal  charge.  Only  after  defendant  has  failed  to  appear  in   court  twice  should  the  Court  even  consider  issuing  a  warrant.   b. If  defendant  has  requested  a  payment  plan  or  community  service  in  the   past,  or  the  Court  has  any  other  reason  to  believe  that  defendant  may  be   indigent,  and  the  defendant  fails  to  make  payment  plan  payments  or   complete  community  service,  the  Court  should  issue  a  summons  and  set  a   show  cause  hearing  prior  to  issuing  an  arrest  warrant.  The  summons   should  include  information  about  proportionate  fines,  community  service,   and  payment  plans.   c. The  Court  should  permit  defendants  to  clear  arrest  warrants  by  going  to   the  courthouse  and  speaking  to  a  clerk  or  judge  to  arrange  a  payment  plan   or  alternative  means  of  satisfying  the  fine.  There  should  be  no  threat  of   arrest  if  a  defendant  comes  to  the  courthouse  to  address  or  pay  unpaid   fines  or  court  costs.     d. The  City  should  not  participate  in  annual  “Warrant  Round-­‐‑Ups”  for   individuals  who  have  only  been  convicted  of  Class  C  misdemeanors  and   other  traffic  offenses.     6) Respect  the  Right  to  Counsel.    The  Court  should  not  jail  defendants  who  were   not  represented  by  counsel  in  their  underlying  criminal  proceedings,  or  who  did   not  knowingly,  intelligently,  and  voluntarily  waive  their  right  to  counsel.     7) Respect  the  Right  of  Public  Access.    All  court  proceedings,  including  jail   magistrations,  should  be  open  to  the  public  pursuant  to  the  First  Amendment  of   the  U.S.  Constitution.     1609 Shoal Creek Blvd., STE 201 Austin, TX 78701 Phone 512.473.2800 Fax 512.473.2813 www.texasappleseed.net info@texasappleseed.net 8 8) Impose  Jail  Terms  Sparingly  and  Only  After  Complying  with  Constitutional   and  Legal  Requirements.    The  Court  should  dramatically  reduce  its  reliance  on   jail  as  an  enforcement  mechanism.         a. Jail  should  only  be  used  as  a  last  resort  for  those  defendants  who  willfully   refuse  to  follow  the  Court’s  orders.     b. Individuals  who  are  booked  at  the  jail  for  unpaid  fines  should  be  brought   before  a  magistrate  as  soon  as  possible.  If  the  magistration  will  not  occur   within  8  hours  of  booking,  the  defendant  should  be  released  on  a  personal   recognizance  bond  and  an  ability  to  pay  hearing  should  be  scheduled.     c. The  judge  presiding  over  magistrations,  or  other  judge  whom  the   defendant  appears  before  after  being  booked,  should  determine  whether   the  defendant  could  have  paid  her  fines  and  still  met  all  her  basic  needs   with  her  current  income.  This  will  require  the  judge  to  inquire  into  and   document  a  defendant’s  income,  dependents,  and  expenses.  The  Court’s   written  guidance  on  ability  to  pay,  referenced  above,  should  inform   decision-­‐‑making  on  ability  to  pay.  Any  defendant  under  a  certain  income   level,  or  receiving  certain  forms  of  government  assistance,  should  be   presumed  indigent  and  unable  to  pay  fines.     d. Judges  should  not  jail  a  defendant  who  is  unable  to  pay  her  fines—the  full   amount  or  a  payment  plan  installment—unless  there  has  been  a  finding  of   willful  failure  to  pay.  In  addition  to  income,  judges  should  consider   whether  the  defendant  made  a  good-­‐‑faith  effort  to  pay  the  installments.     e. Judges  should  not  jail  a  defendant  for  failing  to  satisfy  her  debts  through   community  service,  unless  the  judge  finds  that  (1)  the  defendant  failed  to   make  a  good-­‐‑faith  effort  to  perform  the  service,  and  (2)  it  would  not  have   been  a  hardship  for  the  defendant  to  perform  the  community  service.   f. Judges  should  document  their  findings  at  these  hearings  and  those   findings  should  be  part  of  any  order  entered.   1609 Shoal Creek Blvd., STE 201 Austin, TX 78701 Phone 512.473.2800 Fax 512.473.2813 www.texasappleseed.net info@texasappleseed.net 9