Fuller v. Oregon, 417 U.S. 40 (1974), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that Oregon's statute allowing for the recoupment of costs related to court-appointed defense counsel did not violate either the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause or the Sixth Amendment's Assistance of Counsel Clause. The statute required convicted defendants who were indigent at the time of their trial, but later acquired financial means, to repay the costs of their court-appointed lawyer and investigator.[1][2]

Fuller v. Oregon
Argued March 26, 1974
Decided May 20, 1974
Full case namePrince Eric Fuller v. State of Oregon
Citations417 U.S. 40 (more)
94 S.Ct. 2116; 40 L. Ed. 2d 642; 1974 U.S. LEXIS 55
Holding
(1) The Oregon recoupment scheme does not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. (2) The Oregon law does not infringe upon a defendant's right to counsel, since the knowledge that he may ultimately have to repay the costs of legal services does not affect his ability to obtain such services. The challenged statute is thus not similar to a provision that "chill[s] the assertion of constitutional rights by penalizing those who choose to exercise them."
Court membership
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices
William O. Douglas · William J. Brennan Jr.
Potter Stewart · Byron White
Thurgood Marshall · Harry Blackmun
Lewis F. Powell Jr. · William Rehnquist
Case opinions
MajorityStewart, joined by Burger, White, Blackmun, Powell, Rehnquist
ConcurrenceDouglas
DissentMarshall, joined by Brennan
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. VI; U.S. Const. amend. XIV; Ore.Rev.Stat. § 161.665-161.685

References

edit
  1. ^ Fuller v. Oregon, 417 U.S. 40 (1974).
  2. ^ Beeman, Marea; Elliott, Kellianne; Joy, Rosalie; Allen, Elizabeth; Mrozinsk, Michael (2022). At What Cost? Findings from an Examination into the Imposition of Public Defense System Fees (PDF). National Legal Aid & Defender Association. pp. 22–23.
edit