Document: 384 U.S. 305 86 S.Ct. 1497 16 L.Ed.2d 577 Joseph A. RINALDI, Appellant,v.Howard YEAGER, Warden, et al. No. 940. Argued April 21, 1966. Decided May 31, Frederick B. Lacey, Newark, N.J., for appellant. Alan Handler, appellees. Mr. Justice STEWART delivered the opinion of Court. 1 The appellant, Rinaldi, was convicted a criminal offense in trial court Essex County, New Jersey, and sentenced to prison term give 10 years. Superior Court Appellate Division, allowed him leave appeal forma pauperis granted his petition transcript proceedings, finding that needed Rinaldi unable pay it.1 Rinaldi's unsuccessful, he is now an inmate Jersey State Prison. 2 As compensation work prison, earns 20 cents day, five days week. Since late 1963, however, every day's has been withheld from by officials sent Treasurer order reimburse county $215 cost it provided appeal. This done accordance with statute enacted 1956, shortly after this Court's decision Griffin v. People Illinois, 351 12, 76 585, 100 L.Ed. 891. brought suit enjoin enforcement on ground unconstitutional.2 A three-judge Federal District denied relief, 238 F.Supp. 960, we noted probable jurisdiction, 382 1007, 627, 15 524. 3 question N.J.Stat.Ann. § 2A:152—18 (1964 Cum.Supp.), provides as follows: 4 'The treasurer shall file notice (the payment county) amount thereof institution which said person, upon whose application record prepared, confined, and, extent expense incurred, be reimbursed any institutional earnings such event relief * appellate court.' 5 attacked constitutionality basis our decisions defining duty State, under Equal Protection Clause Due Process Clause, not limit opportunity case because appellant's poverty. supra; Burns Ohio, 360 252, 79 1164, 1209; Draper Washington, 372 487, 83 774, 9 899; cf. Smith Bennett, 365 708, 81 895, 6 39; Lane Brown, 477, C.Ct. 768, 892. logical extension these decisions, appellant contends, would prohibit discouraging indigent's freedom saddling obligation paying unsuccessful. We do reach contention, find constitutionally deficient different ground. law does impose financial burden all who have its courts appeals It requires no repayment at man received suspended sentence or placed probation, regardless how high subsequent may be. unsuccessful only fine.3 Instead, fastens single class appellants those are confined institutions.4 discriminatory classification imposed violates requirements Clause. 7 more state than nondiscriminatory within establishes. McLaughlin Florida, 379 184, 189—190, 85 283, 286—287, 13 222. also imposes requirement some rationality nature singled out. To sure, constitutional demand necessarily apply equally persons. Constitution require things fact treated though they were same.' Tigner Texas, 310 141, 147, 60 879, 882, 84 1124. Hence, legislation special burdens defined classes achieve permissible ends. But that, subject legislation, distinctions drawn 'some relevance purpose made.' Baxstrom Herold, 383 107, 111, 760, 620; Carrington Rash, 380 89, 93, 775, 778, 675; Louisville Gas Co. Coleman, 277 32, 37, 48 423, 425, 72 770; Royster Guano Commonwealth Virginia, 253 412, 415, 40 560, 561 562, 64 989. 8 referred legislative history might disclose precision what designed achieve, but itself bears heading 'Reimbursement.' assume legislature could validly provide replenishing treasury pockets directly benefited expenditures. fasten institutions, make invidious discrimination. Those fines accorded same benefit county—a used appeal, distinguishes them their institutionalized counterparts penalty attached committed. There defensible interest served focusing distinction classifying feature reimbursement statute, since relationship whatever provision. Likewise, probation likely differ record. That, too, trait unrelated fiscal objective statute. Finally, established cannot justified administrative convenience. Any supposed inconvenience minimal, easily made condition parole,5 punished reached through ordinary processes garnishment default.6 Apart objective, other advanced appellees deterrence frivolous appeals. Assuming perform function otherwise valid, present statutory less vulnerable when viewed relation function. By imposing inmates inevitably many appeals, frivolous, leaves untouched indeed. never held States required establish avenues review, fundamental once established, must kept free unreasoned can impede open equal access courts. 891; Douglas California, 353, 814, 811; 892; 899. recoupment later become financially able pay. provision must, applied even hand. 11 judgment reversed, remanded proceedings consistent opinion. 12 Reversed remanded. HARLAN, dissenting. 14 recoups transcripts furnished indigents out allowances incarcerated prisoners, seek parolees defendants imprisoned. holds differentiation violate I am agree. Under conventional equal-protection standards disapprove irrational arbitrary classifications, plainly valid. See 190—191, 287—288, 222; McGowan Maryland, 366 420, 426, 1101, 1105, 393; Lindsley Natural Carbonic Co., 220 61, 78—79, 31 337, 340—341, 55 369. Surely reasonably choose costs allowances, deem worth added time trouble, advisable, attempt extract charges convict support himself own resources. Adhering traditional test rationality, affirm Court.* following authorizes initial imposition county: 'Any person crime oath judge County Law Division where venue laid showing copy record, testimony necessary filing court, unable, reason poverty, defray procuring same, may, being satisfied facts stated sufficiency thereof, certify treasurer, thereupon expense, having approved whom made. Where copies therefor similar which, expense.' 2A:152—17 Cum.Supp.). pursuant R.S. 1979, 42 U.S.C. 1983: 'Every who, color ordinance, regulation, custom, usage, Territory, subjects, causes subjected, citizen United jurisdiction deprivation rights, privileges, immunities secured laws, liable party injured action law, equity, proper proceeding redress.' true fined fine. labor until fine paid. 2A:166—14; 2A:166—16. misdemeanors, permitted go large 2A:166—15. Moreover, felony indigent purposes obtain money thus avoid confinement entails. view another appears wages indebted county. 30:4—92, relevant part: 'Compensation correctional institutions form cash remission both.' receive exchange labor. Other inmates, course, assigned work. allow variations insofar '* person.' (Emphasis supplied.) 2A:168—2; 2A:167—8. Kamisar & Choper, Right Counsel Minnesota: Some Field Findings Legal-Policy Observations, Minn.L.Rev. 1, 23 24: practice certain judges counties studied) others require, repay county's expenditure lawyer. officer usually informs defendant should expected each survey indicates rarely, if ever, violated.' 2A:17—50. substance main argument, lays aside, permit unconstitutional deterrent Nor think there force argument n. (ante, p. 308), suggested best goes validity statutes governing reviewed.

Category: 1