Coronavirus
Judicial Council of California approves $0 bail for low-level suspects
California courts leaders Monday voted to temporarily end cash bail for suspected lower-level offenders as the state’s judicial system continues to confront the coronavirus crisis.
The emergency rules adopted during the Judicial Council of California’s second emergency session go into effect immediately.
California Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye on Monday stressed the emergency measures were temporary but were needed to flatten the curve and stem the spread of the coronavirus in cell blocks and in courtrooms as the courts navigate public health and justice in the middle of a global pandemic.
The order sets bail at $0 for most misdemeanor and lower-level felonies beginning 5 p.m. April 13 until 90 days after the lifting of the statewide coronavirus emergency order. Bail remains for people held for violent crimes, including those suspected of sex or gun crimes; those facing domestic violence charges or people under court-order restraining orders.
A report prepared for Monday’s meeting spelled out the “vital role” courts play in reducing the numbers of inmates in custody while protecting their health and that of the many who work in the jails, transport defendants to court, then return to their communities.
“It’s a welcome decision particularly at this moment of crisis, in a time of emergency when we need to depopulate and decarcerate,” Kate Chatfield, a senior adviser for legislation and policy at The Justice Collaborative, a criminal justice reform think tank, said before the meeting of the proposed move to $0 bail.
“It really shows the physical dangers” of overcrowding, Chatfield added.
On Monday, courts leaders also adopted extending temporary restraining orders and emergency gun violence protective orders due to expire during the pandemic for up to 90 days; and a stay on court foreclosure actions until three months after the state’s COVID-19 emergency order is lifted.
Judicial leaders on March 28 pushed sweeping measures allowing courts to conduct court hearings remotely while extending the time for arraignments and trials to be heard atop earlier orders that delayed jury trials until May.
Lifting cash bail, court leaders reasoned, would allow more people accused of lower-level offenses to be released before their first court appearance – breathing room for local courts to delay and reschedule arraignments to ease the load on skeletal court staffs amid the global health crisis.
Superior courthouses across California are open for only emergency matters and in-custody hearings, or have shut their doors entirely in efforts to curb the virus’ spread. Sacramento and other counties have switched to videoconferencing its hearings, holding proceedings remotely after the state’s chief justice ordered courts to begin using the option.
Chatfield and other advocates say that the reforms they had long advocated – solutions to jail and prison overcrowding, early releases and an end to cash bail, among them – are front-and-center of the courts’ COVID-19 decision making and are encouraging signs.
Counties across California have released hundreds of inmates in recent weeks from overcrowded jails to respond to the outbreak. In Sacramento County, where 541 inmates were released last month, the freed were all non-serious, non-violent offenders near the ends of their jail terms.
San Francisco Public Defender Mano Raju is troubled by the earlier Judicial Council orders out of the March 28 meeting extending the time for arraignments and trials to be heard during a viral outbreak that he said leaves jail detainees especially vulnerable.
“A lot of people are pleading (to criminal charges) that they wouldn’t before because they’re desperate to be released,” Raju said.
But in an interview last week before the Judicial Council’s vote, Raju said the issues facing the justice community could lead to different approaches to crime and punishment.
“Let’s look at this more thoughtfully. In light of this public health crisis, what decisions should be made at this point? Does this person need to be incarcerated pre-trial? Is the amount of days that judges cage people for – is that time necessary for public safety?” Raju said last week before the Judicial Council’s vote. “That’s my hope, that we see this in a more holistic way.”
A previous version of this story and its headline incorrectly stated that the Judicial Council of California’s emergency rules would need to be approved by the state’s chief justice. Instead, the rules went into effect immediately.
.JPG)
Comments