Excessive Bail Clause

Last updated

The Excessive Bail Clause of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits excessive bail set in pre-trial detention. If a judge posts excessive bail, the defendant's lawyer may make a motion in court to lower the bail or appeal directly to a higher court.

Contents

The excessive bail provision of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution is based on old English common law and the English Bill of Rights.

Origins

In England, sheriffs originally determined whether to grant bail to criminal suspects. Because they tended to abuse their power, Parliament passed a statute where bailable and non-bailable offenses were defined. The king's judges often subverted the provisions of the law. It was held that an individual may be held without bail upon the Sovereign's command. Eventually, the Petition of Right of 1628 asserted that the king did not have such authority. Later, technicalities in the law were exploited to keep the accused imprisoned without bail even where the offenses were bailable; such loopholes were for the most part closed by the Habeas Corpus Act 1679. Thereafter, judges were compelled to set bail, but they often required impractical amounts. Finally, the English Bill of Rights (1689) held that "excessive bail ought not to be required". Nevertheless, the bill did not determine the distinction between bailable and non-bailable offenses. [1]

Text

The Eighth Amendment provides:

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Interpretation

The Excessive Bail Clause currently governs only federal pre-trial detention.[ citation needed ]

Presence at trial

In Stack v. Boyle , 342 U.S. 1 (1951), the Court found that a defendant's bail cannot be set higher than an amount that is reasonably likely to ensure the defendant's presence at the trial. In Stack, the Court found bail of $50,000 to be excessive, given the limited financial resources of the defendants and a lack of evidence that they were likely to flee before trial. [2]

Preventive detention

Preventive detentions are when someone is denied bail because the court fears that if the accused is released they will be a danger to the community. Congress authorized preventive detention in the Bail Reform Act of 1984, and the Court upheld the Act in United States v. Salerno , 481 U.S. 739 (1987). The Court held that the only limitation imposed by the bail clause is that "the government's proposed conditions of release or detention not be 'excessive' in light of the perceived evil."

Incorporation

The incorporation status of the Excessive Bail Clause is unclear. In Schilb v. Kuebel , 404 U.S. 357 (1971), the Court stated in dicta: "Bail, of course, is basic to our system of law, and the Eighth Amendment's proscription of excessive bail has been assumed to have application to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment." In Murphy v. Hunt , 455 U.S. 478 (1982), the Court did not reach the issue because the case was dismissed as moot. Bail was included in the list of incorporated rights in McDonald v. Chicago (2010) footnote 12, citing Schilb.

U.S. state law

Most U.S. states have similar provisions for preventing excessive bail. For example, similar prohibitions are contained in the Connecticut Constitution and the Constitution of Hawaii.

Georgia

In 2016, a Federal Court began to evaluate the "pre-set" bail system of Calhoun, Georgia. The involvement stems from a history of lacking consideration for the accused citizen's financial means while making a final bail determination. In 2017, Sally Yates became involved in the ongoing case.

Michigan

In Michigan, a judge or justice may be censured for "setting 'grossly excessive' bail and [thus] showing a 'severe attitude' toward witnesses and litigants", as the Michigan Supreme Court did to a trial judge in 2008. [3] [4]

New Hampshire

In New Hampshire, a writ of habeas corpus which is a summons to the court, may be used to change the amount of excessive bail; the bail must be "reasonable". [5]

New York

New York has seen the development of organizations such as The Bronx Freedom Fund to aid in the release of accused individuals who primarily possess less than $1,000 and have a bond at $1,000 or greater.

Virginia

Virginia's Bill of Rights states: "That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted; that the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended unless when, in cases of invasion or rebellion, the public safety may require; and that the General Assembly shall not pass any bill of attainder, or any ex post facto law." [6]

Notable cases

One example of a large bail requirement was a case in Texas where New York real estate heir Robert Durst received a bail of $3 billion. The Durst's lawyer appealed the bail to the Texas Court of Appeals. The court responded that "it could not find a case where bail was set, let alone upheld, at even 1 percent of any of the amounts against the millionaire, regardless of the underlying offense, wealth of the defendant, or any other circumstance." [7] The court reduced bail to $450,000. [8] [9]

Michael Jackson famously argued for lower bail in his trial concerning alleged child sexual abuse, for which he eventually won the court case. [10] [11]

Zachary Cruz (the brother of Nikolas Cruz, who was convicted of killing 17 people at Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida on February 14, 2018) was arrested on March 19, 2018 for trespassing on the campus of Stoneman Douglas High School. On March 20, 2018, a judge set his bond at $500,000 for the single misdemeanor offense. Although Zachary Cruz's attorney did not specifically reference the Excessive Bail clause, he argued that the bail was excessive, considering the fact that the bond for Criminal Trespass is typically $25. [12]

Related Research Articles

Habeas corpus is a recourse in law through which a person can report an unlawful detention or imprisonment to a court and request that the court order the custodian of the person, usually a prison official, to bring the prisoner to court, to determine whether the detention is lawful.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution</span> 1791 amendment enumerating rights related to criminal prosecutions

The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution sets forth rights related to criminal prosecutions. It was ratified in 1791 as part of the United States Bill of Rights. The Supreme Court has applied all but one of this amendment's protections to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution</span> 1791 amendment regulating forms of punishment

The Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects against imposing excessive bail, excessive fines, or cruel and unusual punishments. This amendment was adopted on December 15, 1791, along with the rest of the United States Bill of Rights. The amendment serves as a limitation upon the federal government to impose unduly harsh penalties on criminal defendants before and after a conviction. This limitation applies equally to the price for obtaining pretrial release and the punishment for crime after conviction. The phrases in this amendment originated in the English Bill of Rights of 1689.

Bail is a set of pre-trial restrictions that are imposed on a suspect to ensure that they will not hamper the judicial process. Bail is the conditional release of a defendant with the promise to appear in court when required. In some countries, especially the United States, bail usually implies a bail bond, a deposit of money or some form of property to the court by the suspect in return for the release from pre-trial detention. If the suspect does not return to court, the bail is forfeited and the suspect may be charged with the crime of failure to appear. If the suspect returns to make all their required appearances, bail is returned after the trial is concluded.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constitution of Hawaii</span>

The Constitution of the State of Hawaii, also known as the Hawaii State Constitution, is the fundamental governing document of the U.S. state of Hawaiʻi. As an organic text, it establishes the principles and framework of government, enumerates the rights and freedoms of Hawaiian citizens, and serves as the supreme law of the state.

In United States constitutional law, incorporation is the doctrine by which portions of the Bill of Rights have been made applicable to the states. When the Bill of Rights was ratified, the courts held that its protections extended only to the actions of the federal government and that the Bill of Rights did not place limitations on the authority of the state and local governments. However, the post–Civil War era, beginning in 1865 with the Thirteenth Amendment, which declared the abolition of slavery, gave rise to the incorporation of other amendments, applying more rights to the states and people over time. Gradually, various portions of the Bill of Rights have been held to be applicable to the state and local governments by incorporation through the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868 and the Fifteenth Amendment in 1870.

United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 (1987), was a United States Supreme Court decision that determined that the Bail Reform Act of 1984 was constitutional, which permitted the federal courts to detain an arrestee prior to trial if the government could prove that the individual was potentially a danger to society. The Act was held to violate neither the United States Constitution's Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment nor its Excessive Bail Clause of the Eighth Amendment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Military Commissions Act of 2006</span> Former United States law

The Military Commissions Act of 2006, also known as HR-6166, was an Act of Congress signed by President George W. Bush on October 17, 2006. The Act's stated purpose was "to authorize trial by military commission for violations of the law of war, and for other purposes".

In United States law, habeas corpus is a recourse challenging the reasons or conditions of a person's confinement under color of law. A petition for habeas corpus is filed with a court that has jurisdiction over the custodian, and if granted, a writ is issued directing the custodian to bring the confined person before the court for examination into those reasons or conditions. The Suspension Clause of the United States Constitution specifically included the English common law procedure in Article One, Section 9, clause 2, which demands that "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it."

In United States law, habeas corpus is a recourse challenging the reasons or conditions of a person's detention under color of law. The Guantanamo Bay detention camp is a United States military prison located within Guantanamo Bay Naval Base. A persistent standard of indefinite detention without trial and incidents of torture led the operations of the Guantanamo Bay detention camp to be challenged internationally as an affront to international, and challenged domestically as a violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth amendments of the United States Constitution, including the right of petition for habeas corpus. In 19 February 2002, Guantanamo detainees petitioned in federal court for a writ of habeas corpus to review the legality of their detention.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pre-trial detention</span> Detention after arrest and charge until a trial

Pre-trial detention, also known as preventive detention, provisional detention, or remand is the process of detaining a person until their trial after they have been arrested and charged with an offence. A person who is on remand is held in a prison or detention centre or held under house arrest. Varying terminology is used, but "remand" is generally used in common law jurisdictions and "preventive detention" elsewhere. However, in the United States, "remand" is rare except in official documents and "kept in custody until trial" is used in the media and even by judges and lawyers in addressing the public. Detention before charge is referred to as custody and continued detention after conviction is referred to as imprisonment.

United States criminal procedure derives from several sources of law: the baseline protections of the United States Constitution, federal and state statutes; federal and state rules of criminal procedure ; and state and federal case law. Criminal procedures are distinct from civil procedures in the US.

Rummel v. Estelle, 445 U.S. 263 (1980), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld a life sentence with the possibility of parole under Texas' three strikes law for a felony fraud crime, where the offense and the defendant's two prior offenses involved approximately $230 of fraudulent activity.

Stack v. Boyle, 342 U.S. 1 (1951), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the arrest of members of the Communist Party who were charged with conspiring to violate the Smith Act. The case regards the Eighth Amendment issue of excessive bail.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States constitutional criminal procedure</span> United States constitutional criminal procedure

The United States Constitution contains several provisions regarding the law of criminal procedure.

The United States Constitution contains several provisions related to criminal sentencing.

North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711 (1969), is a United States Supreme Court case that forbids judicial “vindictiveness” from playing a role in the increased sentence a defendant receives after a new trial. In sum, due process requires that a defendant be “free of apprehension” of judicial vindictiveness. Time served for a new conviction of the same offense must be “fully credited,” and a trial judge seeking to impose a greater sentence on retrial must affirmatively state the reasons for imposing such a sentence.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal law in the Waite Court</span>

During the tenure of Morrison Waite as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, the Supreme Court heard an unprecedented volume and frequency of criminal cases. In just fourteen years, the Court heard 106 criminal cases, almost as many cases as the Supreme Court had heard in the period from its creation to the appointment of Waite as Chief Justice. Notable cases include United States v. Cruikshank (1875), United States v. Reese (1875), Reynolds v. United States (1878), Wilkerson v. Utah (1879), the Trade-Mark Cases (1879), Strauder v. West Virginia (1880), Pace v. Alabama (1883), United States v. Harris (1883), Ex parte Crow Dog (1883), Hurtado v. California (1884), Clawson v. United States (1885), Yick Wo v. Hopkins (1886), United States v. Kagama (1886), Ker v. Illinois (1886), and Mugler v. Kansas (1887).

Bail in the United States refers to the practice of releasing suspects from custody before their hearing, on payment of bail, which is money or pledge of property to the court which may be refunded if suspects return to court for their trial. Bail practices in the United States vary from state to state.

Issue1, the Determining Bail Amount Based on Public Safety Amendment, was a successful ballot measure on the November 2022 general election ballot in Ohio. It added language to the Constitution of Ohio to require consideration of public safety in the setting of bail amounts, and transferred responsibility for establishing bail procedures from the Ohio Supreme Court to the Ohio Legislature.

References

  1. ↑ "Annotation 1 - Eighth Amendment - FindLaw". Findlaw.
  2. ↑ Stack v. Boyle , 342 U.S. 1 (1951). Text
  3. ↑ Debra Cassens Weiss, "Judge Censured for Excessive Bail, Severe Attitude", ABA Journal, February 8, 2008, found at American Bar Association official website. Accessed August 28, 2008.
  4. ↑ In re Judge Norene Redmond of Eastpointe (SC: 134481 Mich. February 6, 2008), order found at Michigan Supreme Court government website Archived May 16, 2008, at the Wayback Machine (pdf file). Accessed August 28, 2008.
  5. ↑ New Hampshire statutes, § 534:6, found at New Hampshire government website. Accessed August 28, 2008.
  6. ↑ "justia.com".
  7. ↑ "$3 Billion Bail is Excessive - TalkLeft: The Politics Of Crime". www.talkleft.com.
  8. ↑ Blog, "$3 Billion Bail is Excessive", found at talkleft.com website. Accessed August 28, 2008.
  9. ↑ Charles V. Bagli, "Durst May Gain His Release Temporarily," September 10, 2004, The New York Times , found at The New York Times website. Accessed August 28, 2008.
  10. ↑ contactmusic.com website. Accessed August 28, 2008.
  11. ↑ MJEOL website Archived September 5, 2008, at the Wayback Machine . Accessed August 28, 2008.
  12. ↑ Geggis, Rafael Olmeda, Anne. "Bond set at $500,000 for Zachary Cruz after prosecutors call him a threat to Parkland". Sun-Sentinel.com. Retrieved March 21, 2018.

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.