(IOWA CAPITAL DISPATCH) – The Iowa Supreme Court says Iowans who are given court-appointed attorneys should not have to pay legal fees if the criminal charges against them are dismissed.

Friday’s ruling by the court stems from a case involving Ronald Pagliai, who was facing criminal charges related to allegations of shoplifting when he requested and was granted a court-appointed attorney. Two of the charges were later dropped after Pagliai agreed to plead guilty in two separate cases. He later argued that he shouldn’t have to reimburse the state of the cost of his defense in the cases that were dropped by prosecutors.

As part of Pagliai’s plea deal, the state had agreed to dismiss the two charges with the understanding that Pagliai would pay the costs in the dismissed cases, which included $329.85 to reimburse the state’s indigent defense fund, plus $160 in filing fees. Pagliai then challenged the district court’s authority to assess costs against a defendant for charges the court had agreed to dismiss.

In its ruling, the Iowa Supreme Court found that the district court had no statutory authority to dispose of the cases by ordering Pagliai to pay defense costs in dismissed cases. It then remanded the matter to district court, giving the state two options as to how the case can proceed: The state can vacate only the order assessing fees and costs to Pagliai, or it can vacate the entire plea bargain, the resulting convictions, the sentences, and the order for payment.

The justices noted that if the state opts to reinstate the charges that had been dismissed as part of a previously agreed-to plea deal, if can then file “any additional charges supported by the available evidence.”

The American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa was among the public-interest groups that filed an amicus brief in the case, arguing that defendants shouldn’t foot the bill for legal fees when the state agrees to dismiss charges.

Alex Kornya, director of litigation for the Legal Aid Justice Center and cooperating attorney for the ACLU of Iowa in the case, said that while the court’s decision provides relief for Iowans moving forward, it also creates a dilemma for Iowans who may open themselves to additional charges by challenging the validity of their own court-ordered payments.

“That basic problem is that thousands of Iowans already, collectively, owe millions of dollars in cases, even though they were convicted of no crime,” he said. “It could present a difficult choice regarding the risk of the prosecution being able to refile charges. Realistically, that may prevent many people who have had debt assessed in the past from being able to take advantage of the court’s decision today.”