Pretrial Monitoring

933 Words2 Pages

People who are arrested, charged with an offense, and subsequently incarcerated to await trial, are subject to an initial appearance in front of a judge, where their eligibility for release is determined. The basic factors considered for release include a person’s likelihood to appear for future court dates, their perceived risk to the community, their prior criminal history, the crime charged, and their ability to pay bail. Historically, release options were either, release on own recognizance, or the imposition of an arbitrary bail amount. A new option for release emerged in the 1980s – release on own recognizance, but with a monitoring component. Primarily referred to as pretrial monitoring, it serves to relieve our nation’s overcrowded …show more content…

Those that qualify either cannot afford a bond, cash or surety, or are not trustworthy enough for release on own recognizance (OR). Pretrial monitoring officers interview defendants and create reports on each person which encapsulate their ties to the community (i.e. family, friends), employment, criminal history, etc. With this report, an officer makes an impartial recommendation to the Court, at the defendant’s initial first appearance; a recommendation for OR, pretrial monitoring, or bond. If a person is granted release on pretrial monitoring, they are subject to the requirements of the program, which will likely be tailored according to the needs and evaluation of the …show more content…

The municipal and county branches, process defendants with misdemeanors, gross misdemeanors, and felonies. Though not the focus of this paper, the U.S. Pretrial Services (USPTS) is worth mentioning on occasion, for comparison. The USPTS emerged from the Pretrial Services Act of 1982 (18 US.C. §3152), and operates within clear and consistent guidelines, whereas local governments do not. Local organizations that operate a pretrial monitoring program, can structurally take many forms. Often, they may operate at the executive level, to remain independent and therefore impartial to the interests of the courts and detention facilities. They will vary in the size of their operation, as well as in what services they can offer, when compared to other cities across the nation. To affirm, fundamentally, the purpose of the program remains intact regardless of its name, jurisdiction, or levels of

Open Document