Bail changes expected following Supreme Court ruling
By Adam Silverman
Free Press Staff Writer
September 14, 2006
Vermont criminal defendants might face higher bail amounts, and bondsmen could see their business increase following a state Supreme Court decision guaranteeing suspects the right to get out of jail by posting a percentage of bail rather than the full amount in cash.
The ruling, though, is unlikely to alter fundamentally the standard practices of prosecutors, who request bail, or the day-to-day conduct of the bond business, experts said.
"The bottom-line effect is, it's probably going to make bail more accessible," said Bill Burnett, owner of South Burlington business Advantage Bail Bonds Vermont.
Supreme Court Justice Marilyn Skoglund, writing the unanimous opinion filed last week in a case arising from Rutland County, said a District Court judge was wrong to require a man accused of driving under the influence -- for the eighth time -- and possessing cocaine to post $60,000 in cash as the only way to win his release pending trial.
The high court invalidated a section of state law that allowed judges to impose so-called "cash only" bail. That more-stringent requirement often is levied on defendants considered a high risk to flee or who are facing serious felony charges, Assistant Attorney General John Treadwell said.
"The court wants a defendant to have a significant financial interest in appearing," he said.
A suspect would have to post the full bail amount in cash or 10 percent plus collateral, such as property, to be freed from jail. The now-overturned state law, which the Legislature passed in 2002, permitted a judge to eliminate the down-payment option, called a surety.
When defendants who have posted bail return to court, their money is returned. If they post a bail through a bondsman, however, the business keeps the 10 percent as a fee, Burnett said. Family members or friends also can put up money and collateral to win a suspect's release.
The Vermont Constitution guarantees a defendant's right to post the lesser amount, Skoglund wrote.
"The imposition of cash-only bail is, in effect, a denial of bail under circumstances that are not constitutionally permissible," Skoglund wrote. "Our constitution makes clear that a defendant, who is after all presumed innocent, has liberty interests that must be balanced against the court's interest in securing his or her appearance."
Skoglund added, however, that courts have discretion to reject surety arrangements that seem insufficient to guarantee a defendant's appearances. Judges also can release suspects on conditions, without imposing bail.
Burnett said the change in bail law will lead to a marginal increase in business. Treadwell said the change could affect how judges and prosecutors operate.
"One might imagine," Treadwell said, "that the way around that might be to impose higher amounts of bail."
A bail amount of $60,000 cash could be achieved by raising that person's bail to $600,000 and requiring 10 percent down, for instance.
Deputy Chittenden County State's Attorney Justin Jiron said that approach seems unlikely.
"We're not supposed to keep picking higher amounts until they can't make it," he said, and added that the State's Attorney's Office most likely will keep operating as usual. "When we ask for bail, we don't really care who's putting it up, whether it's cash or their house as collateral."
As for the suspect at the center of the Supreme Court case, Henry J. Hance Jr., he remained jailed Wednesday night at the Southern State Correctional Facility in Springfield. He has a bail review hearing scheduled for Wednesday.
Contact Adam Silverman at 660-1854 or
asilverm@bfp.burlingtonfreepress.com
