A client of mine was arrested for drug trafficking and posted a $10,000 cash bond. The prosecutor reviewed the evidence and decided the facts only warranted drug possession charges. A grand jury agreed and indicted my client on possession of controlled substance and possession of drug paraphernalia charges. You might think that this would be good news for the client–I certainly did–but the circuit court judge saw it differently…
My client did not commit any new offenses. He didn’t commit any bond violations. But he landed in front of a judge who decided that despite the charges being reduced, an additional bond was required. The circuit court judge decided–sua sponte (on her own)–that upon indictment, my client should have to pay an additional $10,000 for the privilege of staying out of jail.
When my client turned up for his arraignment at the scheduled date and time, he was arrested. I was then informed by the judge’s assistant that his court date was cancelled. Instead of arraigning my client and having the opportunity to request the warrant be quashed or argue to reduce the bond, he was just mysteriously removed from the docket. The judge’s assistant then informed me that my the case could not be heard until next week. I attempted to call the case (which appeared on the CourtNet docket) and the judge refused to let me speak or address my client’s bond.
As I looked around the courtroom, I saw another equally shocked defense attorney. His client had been arrested and her arraignment cancelled after driving in from three hours away to appear in court. Again, there was no allegation of bond violations or additional charges.
Criminal defendants are only supposed to be held in custody 1) to ensure their appearances in court, or 2) because they represent a danger to the community. Reasonable minds can disagree about who represents a danger to the community, but it is hard to argue that without additional charges, someone charged with the lowest level felony (1-3 years) of possession of a controlled substance is. In fact, the statute explicitly says that first and second time offenders under that statute are entitled to presumptive probation. I know from experience that in other counties and other courtrooms, my client would have remained on bond.
So my client will have to spend a week in jail for no discernable reason. And then, he will have to hope that the same judge will be merciful when she reviews the bond. More than anything, this experience drives home the importance of having reasonable judges who are willing to treat both attorneys and criminal defendants with respect.