NCJ Number
108021
Journal
Emory Law Journal Volume: 34 Issue: 3-4 Dated: (Summer-Fall 1985) Pages: 685-740
Date Published
1985
Length
56 pages
Annotation
This analysis of the Bail Reform Act of 1984 focuses on the extent to which it departs from prior law, on cases involving U.S. Supreme Court decisions regarding constitutional limits on excessive bail and pretrial detention, and on significant problems that still confront the courts.
Abstract
The law tries to solve the problem of harm inflicted on innocent victims by defendants released pending trial. Thus, the law permits detention of defendants determined to present an intolerable risk of committing future criminal acts before trial. The Supreme Court has deliberately left unresolved the question of whether an adult defendant may be detained pending trial to further the goal of protecting community safety. However, lower court decisions as well as Supreme Court decisions in Schall v. Martin and Bell v. Wolfish indicate that the law is not considered to violate due process or excessive bail clauses. Lower Federal courts should move cautiously in applying the law, lest they expand its scope beyond its intended limited application. The law has had two major impacts on the administration of bail. First, the courts have failed to respect the limitations of the section on detention hearings regarding dangerousness. Second, they have given too great an effect to the presumption against drug dealers. The presumption against repeat offenders has not yet been used. 223 footnotes.