|
|
OAH 3-1100-21532-2 |
STATE OF
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
|
In the Matter of Michael M. Johnson |
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS, AND ORDER |
This matter was heard by telephone conference call before Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Kathleen D. Sheehy on October 11, 2010, and October 25, 2010. The OAH record closed at the conclusion of the hearing on that date.
Krista Guinn Fink, Associate Legal
Counsel, Minnesota Department of Corrections, appeared on behalf of the
Department of Corrections (DOC). Michael
M. Johnson, Offender Identification No. 168006,
May the Department collect a correctional fee of $300 from Michael Johnson through the Minnesota Revenue Recapture Program?
Based on the evidence in the hearing record, the Administrative Law Judge makes the following:
1. In 1997, Michael Johnson was convicted of second-degree murder in Hennepin County District Court and was ordered to serve a 174-month sentence.[1]
2. Johnson has been released on Intensive Supervised Release (ISR) and subsequently revoked multiple times since 2007.[2]
3.
When he was released on ISR on August 10, 2009,
he was living with his father in
4.
Johnson’s release was revoked in September 2009
and again in June 2010. He is currently
incarcerated at
5. DOC Policy 201.013 (Supervision Fees – Field Services), effective August 4, 2009, provides that offenders placed on supervision must pay a supervision fee in the amount of $300 for each felony. Part B of the Procedures specified in the Policy provides that when an offender has failed to pay the supervision fee within one year and the offender has not received a waiver, staff will submit the unpaid balance for revenue recapture. Unpaid fees are to be immediately submitted for revenue recapture upon revocation of probation and execution of sentence or revocation of supervised release.
6.
By letter dated July 19, 2010, Johnson’s
corrections agent notified him that his supervision fee balance of $300 had
been submitted for collection to the State of
7. On July 30, 2010, Johnson requested a hearing and contended the fee was imposed without his consent.[7]
Based on the Findings of Fact, the Administrative Law Judge makes the following:
1. The ALJ has jurisdiction in this matter pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 241.272, 270A.08 and 270A.09 (2008).[8]
2.
Under
3. The Department of Corrections is a state agency authorized to use the Revenue Recapture Process to collect debts.[10]
4. Michael Johnson is liable for a supervision fee in the amount of $300, and the Department of Corrections may use the Revenue Recapture Process to collect it.
Based on the Conclusions, the Administrative Law Judge makes the following:
IT IS ORDERED that the request of the Department of Corrections to collect the $300 supervision fee from Michael M. Johnson through Revenue Recapture is AFFIRMED.
Dated: November 4, 2010.
s/Kathleen D. Sheehy
|
KATHLEEN D. SHEEHY Administrative Law Judge |
Reported: Digitally recorded;
No Transcript Prepared
NOTICE
This Order is the final Decision in this matter pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 270A.09, subd. 3. Any person aggrieved by this Decision may seek judicial review pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 14.63 to 14.68.
MEMORANDUM
During the hearing, the corrections agent clarified Mr. Johnson’s confusion about the origin of the fee. Mr. Johnson incorrectly believed that it had been imposed without his consent for home monitoring equipment when he was placed on house arrest, or that it had been imposed based on his status as a fugitive. The corrections agent explained that the fee is imposed on every offender who is placed on supervised release. Mr. Johnson then objected to the fee on the basis that he would have chosen to serve his time without being released if he had known that a supervision fee would be imposed. The record reflects that Mr. Johnson has taken every opportunity available to him (six times) to be discharged from prison on supervised release.
As a factual matter, Mr. Johnson has not established that he would have declined release from prison had he known about the $300 fee. More importantly, as a legal matter, it is immaterial whether Mr. Johnson knew about the fee prior to his release in August 2009. The statute gives the commissioner of corrections the discretion to impose and collect the fee at any time while the offender is under sentence or after sentence has been discharged, and the commissioner may use any available means to collect the debt.[11]
Mr. Johnson also argued that he was entitled to appointment of a public defender to represent him during the hearing. At the outset of the hearing on October 10, 2010, Mr. Johnson expressed his mistaken understanding that counsel for the Department of Corrections would serve as his attorney during the hearing. The Administrative Law Judge then granted a continuance of the hearing from October 10, 2010, to October 25, 2010, to allow Mr. Johnson time to seek legal assistance elsewhere. When the hearing reconvened on October 25, 2010, Mr. Johnson stated that he believed he was entitled to appointment of counsel at public expense and objected to proceeding without an attorney. The Administrative Law Judge overruled his objection on the basis that this matter is not a criminal proceeding and there is no apparent constitutional or statutory authority for requiring anyone to represent him.
K.D.S.