美国宪法第八修正案明确禁止“过度保释”，宪法中没有对“过度保释”一词进行定义，最高法院也对其含义进行了权衡，认为保释不能定得太高，以至于成为强迫被告继续坐牢的伎俩。但是，法院还裁定，《第八修正案》对过度保释的限制并不构成任何保释权——法院在某些情况下可能根本拒绝释放被告。结合他丰富的专业知识，我们公司充分利用了在不同法院工作的强大法律专业知识。
刑罚加起来可以是数额巨大的金钱，而监狱的量刑与诈骗造成的经济损失成比例一个有白领和欺诈辩护经验的律师不仅可以帮助辩护指控，而且可以减少处罚。
美国宪法第八修正案明确禁止“过度保释”，宪法中没有对“过度保释”一词进行定义，最高法院也对其含义进行了权衡，认为保释不能定得太高，以至于成为强迫被告继续坐牢的伎俩。但是，法院还裁定，《第八修正案》对过度保释的限制并不构成任何保释权——法院在某些情况下可能根本拒绝释放被告。结合他丰富的专业知识，我们公司充分利用了在不同法院工作的强大法律专业知识。
The Supreme Court has noted that bail and the refusal to set bail also implicate the right to due process found in the Fourteenth and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution. As a result, the Supreme Court has held that a judge must provide a “compelling governmental interest” for keeping a defendant in jail pending trial (in other words, refusing to set bail). (United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739, 754-55 (1987).)
The constitutional protections, as well as the Bail Reform Act (a federal statute), give a defendant the right to request lower bail when the amount initially set by the court is too high to pay. A defendant can request a hearing to seek a bail reduction.
At the hearing, the defendant can argue that the initial bail set by the court is so high that it is effectively a denial of bail and amounts to pretrial detention in jail, even though the defendant is not a flight risk or a threat to the public. (18 USC § 3142 (c)(2).) Although the court must take this argument into consideration, it is not required to set bail at a level that the defendant can easily pay. Courts can set bail high enough “to induce a defendant to go to great lengths to raise the funds without violating” the constitution or the Bail Reform Act. (U.S. v. Szot, 768 F.2d 159 (7thCir., 1985).) As long as the court’s actual motive is not to just force the defendant to rot in jail awaiting trial, the court can set bail at any level it can justify.
Once a defendant informs the court, through a bail reduction request or otherwise, that she cannot afford the bail set, the court must specify the reason(s) that the amount set is “an indispensable” condition of release from jail. (U.S. v. Montececon-Zayas, 949 F.2d 548 (1st Cir. 1991).) The court must set out its rationale in writing. (Fed. Rule of App. Proced. 9.)
Just as the defendant has the right to seek a lower bail, the prosecution can request that the court set a higher level of bail based on the risk that the defendant will flee from the jurisdiction or inflict harm upon a victim or other members of the public. (18 USC § 3142 (f).) And, the court may hold a hearing to inquire into the source of bail funds that it suspects may be illegal (proceeds from drug sales, for example). Bail is only one of the conditions that a court may impose in order to grant release of a defendant from jail pending trial. Other conditions include travel restrictions, relinquishing a passport, drug testing, electronic monitoring devices (ankle bracelets), house arrest, supervision and reporting during release, and others.
Sometimes you may find yourself in difficult situations and not be able to defuse the situation without going to court. Our team leverages the robust legal expertise of working in different courts and legal systems. You can simply ask our lawyers in our company what those are and how you can benefit from them.
The Supreme Court has noted that bail and the refusal to set bail also implicate the right to due process found in the Fourteenth and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution. As a result, the Supreme Court has held that a judge must provide a “compelling governmental interest” for keeping a defendant in jail pending trial (in other words, refusing to set bail). (United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739, 754-55 (1987).)
The constitutional protections, as well as the Bail Reform Act (a federal statute), give a defendant the right to request lower bail when the amount initially set by the court is too high to pay. A defendant can request a hearing to seek a bail reduction.
At the hearing, the defendant can argue that the initial bail set by the court is so high that it is effectively a denial of bail and amounts to pretrial detention in jail, even though the defendant is not a flight risk or a threat to the public. (18 USC § 3142 (c)(2).) Although the court must take this argument into consideration, it is not required to set bail at a level that the defendant can easily pay. Courts can set bail high enough “to induce a defendant to go to great lengths to raise the funds without violating” the constitution or the Bail Reform Act. (U.S. v. Szot, 768 F.2d 159 (7thCir., 1985).) As long as the court’s actual motive is not to just force the defendant to rot in jail awaiting trial, the court can set bail at any level it can justify.
Once a defendant informs the court, through a bail reduction request or otherwise, that she cannot afford the bail set, the court must specify the reason(s) that the amount set is “an indispensable” condition of release from jail. (U.S. v. Montececon-Zayas, 949 F.2d 548 (1st Cir. 1991).) The court must set out its rationale in writing. (Fed. Rule of App. Proced. 9.)
