STATE OF MICHIGAN

FRANK J. KELLEY, ATTORNEY GENERAL

Opinion No. 6606

November 21, 1989

CORRECTIONS, DEPARTMENT OF:

Authority to deduct cost of maintenance from wages or bonuses of prisoner working for prison industries

PRISONS AND PRISONERS:

Reimbursement of cost of maintenance of prisoner from wages or bonuses paid prisoner by correctional industries

The Department of Corrections may not make deductions from the wages or bonuses of a prisoner working for correctional industries to reimburse the state for the cost of maintenance of the prisoner.

The state's cost of maintaining a prisoner may be recovered from the estate of a prisoner consisting of property owned by the prisoner other than wages or bonuses of the prisoner earned while working for correctional industries.

Robert J. Brown, Jr.

Director

Department of Corrections

Stevens T. Mason Building

Lansing, Michigan 48913

You have requested my opinion on the question of whether the Correctional Industries Act, 1968 PA 15, MCL 800.321 et seq; MSA 28.1540(1) et seq (Act 15), or the State Correctional Facility Reimbursement Act, 1935 PA 253, MCL 800.401 et seq; MSA 28.1701 et seq (Act 253), authorize the Department of Corrections to deduct funds from the wages or bonuses of a prisoner working for the correctional industries program to reimburse the state for that prisoner's cost of care.

The purpose of Act 15 is expressed in Sec. 11, MCL 800.331; MSA 28.1540(11), which provides, in pertinent part:

The provisions of Act 15, Sec. 11(1)(b), MCL 800.331(1)(b); MSA 28.1540(11)(1)(b), are essentially identical with 1935 PA 210, Sec. 10(b), the predecessor act regulating the employment of prison labor and establishing a system of prison industries. 1935 PA 210 was repealed by Act 15, Sec. 15, MCL 800.335; MSA 28.1540(15).

Neither Act 15 nor its predecessor act, 1935 PA 210, contain any express provision authorizing prison authorities to deduct a portion of a prisoner's wages or bonuses to pay for the costs of maintaining the prisoner. This omission was not unintentional. The same legislature which enacted 1935 PA 210 also enacted what was then known as the Prison Reimbursement Act, 1935 PA 253, supra, which authorizes legal proceedings to be brought against the prisoner to recover from the estate of the prisoner expenses incurred by the state in maintaining the prisoner. Act 253, Sec. 4, MCL 800.404; MSA 28.1704, as originally enacted, required notice to the prisoner, a hearing, and a determination by the court as to the payment from the estate of the prisoner of a proper part of the state's cost to maintain the prisoner with due regard for claims, if any, of persons entitled to maintenance. It is noted that 1935 PA 210 was approved by the Governor on June 7, 1935 and 1935 PA 253 was approved by the Governor on June 8, 1935. Thus, each was enacted by the same Legislature and signed by the Governor on succeeding days. The Legislature must be deemed to have been aware of the provisions of each. Reichert v Peoples State Bank for Savings, 265 Mich 668; 252 NW 484 (1934).

While the Legislature did not define the term "estate" in 1935 PA 253, its meaning depends upon the context of the words with which it is used. In re Estate of Reynolds, 274 Mich 354, 362; 264 NW 399 (1936). From a reading of the provisions of Act 253, Sec. 4, MCL 800.404; MSA 28.1704, as originally enacted, the estate would consist of every species of property, real or personal, owned by the prisoner, including income received as wages by the prisoner. See In re Kraft's Guardianship, 33 NW2d 534, 536 (Neb, 1948).

In 1937, however, the Legislature enacted 1937 PA 272 to amend Act 253 to add Sec. 7, MCL 800.407; MSA 28.1707, which provided:

Act 253 was extensively amended by 1984 PA 282 and was renamed the State Correctional Facility Reimbursement Act. The Legislature added Sec. 1a, MCL 800.401a; MSA 28.1701(1), which in pertinent part provides:

Section 7 of Act 253 was repealed by 1984 PA 282, and section 3 of Act 253, MCL 800.403; MSA 28.1703, was amended to authorize the Attorney General to seek reimbursement for the cost of maintenance of a prisoner by the state from the prisoner's assets.

This review of the legislative history of Act 15 and Act 253 demonstrates that the Department of Corrections is not authorized by the Legislature under either act to deduct funds from the wages and bonuses of a prisoner who is employed by correctional industries to reimburse the state for the cost of maintenance of the prisoner.

The state's cost of maintaining the prisoner may be recovered, however, from the estate of the prisoner consisting of property owned by the prisoner other than the wages or bonuses earned while working for correctional industries, as provided in Act 253, Sec. 404 et seq; MCL 800.404 et seq; MSA 28.1704 et seq.

It is my opinion, therefore, that the Department of Corrections may not make any deductions from the wages or bonuses of a prisoner working for the correctional industries to reimburse the state for the cost of maintenance of the prisoner. It is my further opinion that the state's cost of maintaining a prisoner may be recovered from the estate of a prisoner consisting of property owned by the prisoner other than wages or bonuses of the prisoner earned while working for correctional industries.

Frank J. Kelley

Attorney General