NCJ Number
86852
Date Published
1982
Length
189 pages
Annotation
This comparative study of felony bail processes in Detroit and Baltimore during 1972 reveals the extent to which changes in bail policies are influenced by factors outside the court's control (i.e., by political figures, minority input).
Abstract
More defendants were freed on their own recognizance and received lower bail amounts in Detroit than in Baltimore. Detroit's prodefendant sentiment reflected community dissatisfaction with the criminal justice system, especially after the 1967 riot, during which several thousand blacks were detained through exorbitant bails. The decisive event, however, was the imposition of a population limit on the Wayne County jail, which had been overcrowded with felony defendants awaiting hearings or trials. Accordingly, the court contracted the scope of its bail policies by expanding recognizance release. The need to reduce overcrowding took precedence over public safety considerations, even though judges and the public remain concerned. In contrast, the situation in Baltimore was hostile to bail reform. Court officials, whose tenure is more insecure and whose status is lower than in Detroit, had fewer incentives to narrow the scope of bail policies, particularly for felony defendants. These officials were not constrained by limited detention resources, despite furor over the local jail, as in Detroit. The author presents a model depicting when and where courts would seek solutions to crises arising from jail overcrowding. He notes the effect of reforms on minimizing the extent and cost of pretrial punishment for felony defendants. Study data, chapter references, an index, and forms and research methods are provided.