Bail Reform: Unproven Accusations

by | Jan 26, 2017 | Blog, Criminal Law, Law Reform and Amendments

Fred Sisto Brick Lawyer“The third category also applies to cases where the automated pretrial risk-assessment results in a high Failure to Appear (FTA) or New Criminal Activity (NCA) score, see note 9 and subsection 7.4.2, or if a New Violent Criminal Activity (NVCA) flag is raised, see subsection 7.4.5, or where the pretrial risk-assessment process results in a moderate risk of Failure to Appear or New Criminal Activity and the defendant has a violent juvenile history. See subsection 7.4.3. This third category also includes cases where the current charge is serious and was committed while defendant was on pretrial release for another offense or was subject to any form of post-conviction monitoring. See subsection 7.4.4. Note that because the risk indicators addressed in the third category are closely related and overlap, a particular case may fall under two or more subsections within this third category.

Note that in  addition to establishing substantive  standards and  criteria to guide the exercise of prosecutorial discretion in deciding when to seek pretrial detention, this Directive establishes procedural safeguards to ensure consistency and uniformity. Certain decisions must be approved by the County Prosecutor or First Assistant Prosecutor, or by the Director of the Division of Criminal Justice or a Deputy  Director in cases prosecuted by the Division, while  certain other decisions may  be made by other supervisory assistant prosecutors/deputy attorneys general designated by the County Prosecutor or Director. Specifically, County Prosecutor/First Assistant/Director/Deputy Director approval is required before a pretrial detention motion may be filed unless the Bail  Reform  Law creates a presumption of detention (i.e., where the defendant is charged  with murder or is subject to  an ordinary or extended term of life imprisonment), or unless this Directive establishes a rebuttable presumption of seeking pretrial detention. See Section 7.4. In addition, County Prosecutor/First Assistant/Director/Deputy Director approval is required if the decision is to refrain from seeking pretrial detention in a case where the defendant is charged  with  murder  or is subject to an ordinary  or extended term of life imprisonment. See Section 7.3. The approval of a designated supervisor is sufficient when  the decision is made to seek pretrial  detention, or refrain  from seeking detention, in  a case where this Directive establishes a rebuttable presumption of filing a pretrial detention motion. See Section 7.4.   See also  Section 7.8. (designation  of  supervisors).”

Also of great concern is the fact that pretrial detention decisions will be triggered by a new accusation being filed against a suspect that has a single, unproven accusation pending against them. Since the probable cause standard for a new charge is very low, especially at the time of the initial ex parte, the new law lends itself to allowing law enforcement to trigger pretrial detention with a simple accusation in cases where they do not agree with the decision to release the accused on bail on the initial charge.

Excellent rating
Based on 288 reviews
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Mr. Fred Sisto is really an amazing attorney! Professional, knowledgeable, and effective. He made me feel comfortable in knowing he was working countless hours on my case to get me the best possible outcome. Mr. Sisto was very responsive and kept me updated with all court proceedings/updates. I am thankful to have had him represent me. I will be recommending Mr. Sisto & his firm to anyone in need. Thanks again ! Much Appreciated
Javier B
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
i have not needed the service of fred sisto but am grateful for the notices i receive
Bill P
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Very informative. Would not hesitate to use Attorney Sisto.
Rose C
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Exquisite business ethic couldn't ask for a better service from a lawyer superior job def recommend to friends family and even strangers
Lukas A
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred was extremely helpful and knowledgable. He made the whole process as painless and easy as possible.
Toli C
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Great legal advice and services
Karen E
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
I recommend good lawyer
Norman T
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
I would highly recommend Frederick Sisto to anyone seeking legal representation that is fair, honest and will keep your best interest forefront. should the situation arise, i would not hesitate to seek representation from Frederick Sisto again.
Rmean
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
I was very pleased with my representation by Fred Sisto. He is very honest and explained everything to me in detail. I would recommend him to anybody who is seeking legal representation..
Jeff M
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
I am writing to share my experience working with Fred From the very beginning, he provided outstanding service and demonstrated a high level of professionalism. He was attentive to my needs, communicated clearly, and always made sure I understood each step of the process. What impressed me most was his efficiency—he handled my case quickly without compromising on quality. His dedication and expertise gave me confidence and peace of mind throughout the entire process. I highly recommend Fred to anyone seeking reliable and effective legal support. His commitment to his clients and ability to deliver results promptly truly set him apart.
Aida F