NCJ Number
125690
Editor(s)
L L Weinreb
Date Published
1990
Length
18 pages
Annotation
This chapter presents two edited, leading U.S. Supreme Court decisions involving the rights of accuseds in the context of the bail hearing.
Abstract
Stack v. Boyle (1951) holds that bail set in an excessive amount measured by bail typically set for similar offenses requires evidence to justify such a departure. In this case, the prosecution, without the introduction of evidence, asked the court to believe the accuseds were at high risk of fleeing. The Court concluded that bail was not fixed by proper methods and that the petitioners' remedy is by motion to reduce bail, with right of appeal to the court of appeals. United States v. Salerno addresses the ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit that struck down a provision of the Bail Reform Act of 1984. The provision at issue allows a Federal court to detain an arrestee pending trial if the State demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence through an adversary hearing that no release condition will reasonably ensure the safety of any other person and the community. The court of appeals ruling that this provision is unconstitutional is reversed in United States v. Salerno. The Court holds that when the State proves by clear and convincing evidence that an arrestee presents an identified and articulable threat to an individual or the community, the court may detain the arrestee, consistent with the due process clause. The dissenting opinion in this case is provided. 7 footnotes.