State v. Balsam, 2
| Decision Date | 16 September 1981 |
| Docket Number | CA-CR,No. 2,2 |
| Citation | 130 Ariz. 452,636 P.2d 1234 |
| Parties | The STATE of Arizona, Appellee, v. Matthew BALSAM, Appellant. 2337. |
| Court | Arizona Court of Appeals |
Pursuant to a plea agreement, appellant pled guilty to unlawful use of a means of transportation, in violation of A.R.S. § 13-1803 (an open-ended offense). He was placed on probation for three years upon several terms and conditions. One condition was that he reimburse the state for extradition costs in the amount of $853, to be paid within two years with the monthly payment schedule to be set by the probation department. Appellant challenges the trial court's authority to impose this condition of reimbursement. We find no merit in his position.
A.R.S. § 13-901(A), as amended, authorizes probation "upon such terms and conditions as the court deems appropriate." Certain conditions are mandatory-waiver of extradition for probation revocation procedures and restitution when there is a victim who has suffered economic loss. We agree with appellant that the required reimbursement is neither a defense cost nor a fine. We also agree with him that the $853 was a prosecution cost, the sum expended to send a deputy sheriff to Ohio, where appellant was arrested, and bring him back to Arizona for prosecution. Appellant's waiver of extradition did not obliterate this expense.
Appellate courts do not interfere with the trial court's discretionary authority to impose conditions of probation unless the conditions violate fundamental rights or bear no relationship whatever to the purpose of probation over incarceration. State v. Montgomery, 115 Ariz. 583, 566 P.2d 1329 (1977); State v. Cummings, 120 Ariz. 69, 583 P.2d 1389 (App.1978). We believe that making appellant pay the $853 as a condition of probation may serve a useful purpose in his rehabilitation. The presentence report indicates that appellant has the inherent ability and resources to become a productive member of society but needs to take some responsibility for changing his behavior. An effective way to awaken appellant's sense of social responsibility and aid in his rehabilitation is to require him to repay the costs society has incurred as a result of his misconduct. Since the reimbursement imposed as a condition of probation was clearly related to appellant's prosecution, it was not an unreasonable condition. See State v. Smith, 118 Ariz. 345, 576 P.2d 533 (App.1978). Appellant's reliance on State v. Gelden, 126 Ariz. 232, 613 P.2d 1288 (App.1980) is...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Ryyth
...or prosecution," have held that costs of prosecution include extradition costs. Maupin, 801 P.2d at 487; State v. Balsam, 130 Ariz. 452, 636 P.2d 1234, 1235 (Ct.App.1981) (sum expended to send a deputy sheriff to Ohio, where defendant was arrested, and bring him back to Arizona for prosecut......
-
State v. Lack
...ofttimes be a compelling reminder of the wrong done and meaningfully contribute to the rehabilitation process." In State v. Balsam, 130 Ariz. 452, 636 P.2d 1234 (Ct.App.1981), the court similarly stated, "An effective way to awaken appellant's sense of social responsibility and aid in his r......
-
State v. DiGeno
...the defendant was arrested and bring him back for prosecution. 166 Ariz. at 252, 801 P.2d 485 ; see also State v. Balsam , 130 Ariz. 452, 453, 636 P.2d 1234, 1235 (App. 1981). Maupin , therefore, suggests that costs of prosecution include more than costs incurred directly by the county atto......
-
State v. Hersch
...662 P.2d 1035 ... 135 Ariz. 528 ... The STATE of Arizona, Appellee, ... Robert Michael HERSCH, Appellant ... No. 2 CA-CR 2594 ... Court of Appeals of Arizona, ... Division 2 ... Dec. 22, 1982 ... On Motion for Rehearing Feb. 17, 1983 ... Rehearing Denied Apr ... We held in State v. Balsam, 130 Ariz. 452, 636 P.2d 1234 (App.1981), that the payment of a cost of prosecution, extradition expense, could be imposed as a probation condition ... ...