NCJ Number
25809
Date Published
1972
Length
15 pages
Annotation
BASED ON A STUDY OF 1,473 BAIL SETTINGS OBSERVED IN 1964 IN A NEW YORK COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT, THIS PAPER EXAMINES THE INTERACTION PATTERNS AT BAIL SETTING, THE AMOUNT AND AND EFFECT OF DISAGREEMENT, AND EACH PARTY'S INFLUENCE.
Abstract
FACTORS WHICH INFLUENCED BAIL DECISIONS WERE PREVIOUS CRIMINAL HISTORY, TYPE OF CHARGE, AND PRESENCE OR ABSENCE OF A RELEASE ON RECOGNIZANCE RECOMMENDATION. THE MORE SERIOUS THE CHARGE, THE MORE EXTENSIVE THE PRIOR RECORD, AND THE WEAKER THE DEFENDANT'S COMMUNITY TIES, THE GREATER WAS THE CHANCE FOR HIGH BAIL OR BAIL DENIAL. STATISTICS ON BAIL SUGGESTIONS AND FINAL BAIL DECISIONS ARE EXAMINED. THE DEFENSE ATTORNEY WAS FOUND TO BE THE LEAST INFLUENTIAL MEMBER OF THE COURT; NOT ONLY IS HE THE LEAST LIKELY TO MAKE THE INITIAL BAIL SUGGESTION, BUT HE HAS THE LEAST CHANCE OF MAKING HIS SUGGESTION STICK. THE JUDGE AND THE PROSECUTOR WERE RECIPROCALLY SUPPORTIVE. THEY SUBSCRIBED TO THE SAME BAIL-SETTING STANDARDS, THEY DISAGREED WITH EACH OTHER FAR LESS OFTEN THAN EITHER DISAGREED WITH THE DEFENSE ATTORNEY, AND THEY SHOWED THE SAME CONCERN FOR THE PEOPLE'S INTEREST. THE AUTHOR SUGGESTS THAT A LATENT REASON FOR CONTINUING THE BAIL SYSTEM IS TO DIFFUSE THE BLAME FOR POSSIBLE CRIMES OF THE DEFENDANT COMMITTED WHILE ON BAIL. THIS MAY BE THE REASON, HE ARGUES, THAT JUDGES AGREE WITH PROSECUTORIAL SUGGESTIONS ON BAIL AMOUNTS, FOR BY SETTING CASH BAIL SOME OF THE JUDGE'S RESPONSIBILITY IS SHIFTED TO THE DEFENDANT AND THE PROSECUTOR. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)