ALASKA COURT RULES

Trial Change of plea Post-conviction relief or contested probation revocation proceedings in the trial court $500.00 200.00 250.00 (B) continue the appointment and, at the conclusion of the criminal proceedings against the defendant in the trial court, enter judgment against the defendant for the actual cost of appointed counsel from the date of the appointment through the conclusion of the trial court proceedings. Trial Change of plea after substantive motion work and hearing and before trial commences Change of plea post-indictment but prior to substantive motion work and hearing Change of plea prior to indictment Post-conviction relief or probation revocation proceeding in trial court Class B & C Felonies Class A and Unclassified (Except Murder) Murder in the 1st and 2nd Degrees $1,500.00 $2,500.00 $5,000.00 1,000.00 1,500.00 2,500.00 500.00 1,000.00 2,000.00 (4) A defendant may request review of the court’s decision to terminate the appointment according to the procedure set out in subparagraph 39(b)(5). (5) Judgment may be entered against a defendant under this paragraph regardless of whether the defendant is convicted of an offense. (Adopted by SCO 4 October 4, 1959; amended by SCO 90 effective July 24, 1967: by SCO 157 effective February 15, 1973; by Amendment No. 4 to SCO 157 dated March 12, 1973; by SCO 187 effective July 2, 1974; by SCO 328 effective January 1, 1979; by SCO 448 effective November 24 1980; by SCO 677 effective June 15, 1986; and by SCO 888 effective July 15, 1988; rescinded and re-promulgated by SCO 1088 effective July 1, 1992; amended by SCO 1139 effective July 1, 1993; by SCO 1145 effective October 1, 1993; by SCO 1351 effective May 15, 1999; by SCO 1555 effective October 15, 2004; and by SCO 1566 effective May 15, 2005) 250.00 500.00 750.00 Dissent to SCO 1088: 250.00 500.00 750.00 (e) Review of Defendant’s Financial Condition. (1) The court may review a defendant’s financial status at any time after appointment of counsel to determine (A) whether the defendant continues to be eligible for court- appointed counsel under Criminal Rule 39.1; or (B) whether the defendant was eligible for court-appointed counsel when the appointment was made. (2) If the court determines that a defendant is no longer eligible for court-appointed counsel under Criminal Rule 39.1, the court may (A) terminate the appointment; or (B) continue the appointment and, at the conclusion of the criminal proceedings against the defendant in the trial court, enter judgment against the defendant for the actual cost of appointed counsel, including actual expenses, from the date of the change in the defendant’s financial status through the conclusion of the trial court proceedings. (3) If the court determines that a defendant was not eligible for court-appointed counsel when the appointment was made, the court may (A) terminate the appointment and enter judgment against the defendant for the actual costs of appointed counsel, including actual expenses, from the date of appointment through the date of termination; or 68 RABINOWITZ, Chief Justice, with whom COMPTON, Justice, joins, dissenting: I am not persuaded that either existing Criminal Rule 39, or Appellate Rule 209, requires amendment. I think it can be safely predicted that these amendments will have a chilling effect on an indigent defendant’s obtaining the services of appointed counsel as well as on an indigent defendant’s decision whether or not to seek review or to appeal.