7 results for 'cat:"Bail" AND cat:"Due Process"'.
Per curiam, the Vermont Supreme Court finds that the lower court properly held the defendant without bond pending trial for sexual assault without consent. Defendant’s confession that he did try to penetrate his live-in girlfriend’s anus and her sworn statements were enough evidence to hold him without bond. He argues that his due process was violated when the weight of the evidence hearing was delayed, but he did not preserve that objection for review. Affirmed.
Court: Vermont Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: April 30, 2024, Case #: 24-AP-098, Categories: Sex Offender, bail, due Process
J. Che finds that the lower court properly issued a no-bail bench warrant against defendant for not appearing at a pretrial hearing, a warrant that eventually led to defendant's arrest. Defendant challenges the legality of the no-bail portion of the warrant, and under the law, a no-bail bench warrant is legal as long as a subsequent bail determination is held within 48 hours of defendant's arrest. Because that hearing did take place within the allotted time, defendant's due process rights were not violated. Affirmed.
Court: Washington Court Of Appeals, Judge: Che, Filed On: March 12, 2024, Case #: 57332-6-II, Categories: bail, due Process
J. Garcia finds that the appellate division improperly denied defendant habeas relief after he committed additional violent felonies while out on bail awaiting trial. Such defendants can be remanded if considered a flight risk or if viewed as a danger to the community at large, but since defendant fell into the latter category, a hearing should have been held to submit witness testimony, evidence, or grand jury transcripts. Reversed.
Court: New York Court Of Appeals, Judge: Garcia, Filed On: February 20, 2024, Case #: 04, Categories: Habeas, bail, due Process
J. Richardson finds the lower court improperly denied the detainee's motion for a preliminary injunction, releasing them and others in a similar circumstance without stated cause. The detainees contend that the pretrial services’ pretrial-release program violates due process by detaining someone after a judge has determined that there are possible conditions under which that person can be released. The court denied the motion without providing reasons. Federal law requires that when granting or refusing a preliminary injunction, a court state the findings of fact and conclusions of law that support its action. Vacated.
Court: 4th Circuit, Judge: Richardson, Filed On: November 15, 2023, Case #: 23-6359, Categories: bail, due Process, Class Action
J. Rodriguez finds a lower court ruled correctly in revoking defendant’s community supervision for violating a protective order after he allegedly failed to submit to required drug testing. Defendant argued the revocation was “unduly influenced by a pending murder charge against him,” but defendant was aware of his probation requirements and therefore “[d]ue process was satisfied.” Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Rodriguez, Filed On: August 16, 2023, Case #: 08-23-00120-CR, Categories: bail, due Process, Commitment
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Zamora finds a lower court erred when it denied a motion by prosecutors to detain defendant prior to trial in a murder case. The lower court failed to adequately consider factors that justified pretrial detention, including defendant’s “dangerousness,” “extensive criminal history” and past “failures to appear.” Reversed.
Court: New Mexico Supreme Court, Judge: Zamora, Filed On: May 22, 2023, Case #: S-1-SC-39744, Categories: Murder, bail, due Process