George Zimmerman Bail Set at $1 Million
Posted on Thu Jul 05, 2012 at 11:04:41 AM EST
Tags: George Zimmerman, Trayvon Martin (all tags)
Update: You can read the bail order here. My analysis is below.
The Judge has set George Zimmerman's bail at $1 million. He has to post 10%, will not be allowed to open a bank account, and must be on GPS. Order to follow. Feel free to discuss here or at TalkLeft Forums.
The Court on page 5 confirms "the State failed to prove that the Defendant may be held without bond." On page 4, he repeats his finding the evidence is "strong", and says that the June 29 hearing was not an Arthur hearing, so the evidence on self-defense presented by the defense is mostly irrelevant. He lists a number of short-comings in the defense presentation at both the April 20 and June 29 bail hearing. [More...]
Notably, at the initial bond hearing, this Court had only limited evidence; to that point, the State showed the Defendant had shot and killed Trayvon Martin. There was other evidence presented through the probable cause affidavit and the testimony of Dale Gilbreath, an investigator with the State Attorney's Office, that the Defendant's actions were imminently dangerous to another and that he acted with a depraved mind regardless of human life. The Defendant certainly indicated through cross-examination that he acted in self-defense, but he put forward no evidence such. (Argument by counsel is not evidence.) As a consequence, this Court found as a preliminary matter that the evidence against the Defendant was "strong."But O'Mara did present evidence on April 20 -- the testimony of Investigator Gibreath -- who made several admissions of shortcomings in the state's case.
The Judge then quotes Art. 1 Section 18 of the Florida Constitution which states bond can only be denied as a matter of right if the state has proven "the proof of guilt is evident and the presumption great." He says the strength of the self-defense case now is of limited relevance to the issue of whether bond should be granted and he does not opine on it. He says that's an issue for a Stand Your Ground hearing or at trial.
That the Defendant shot and killed the victim is virtually undisputed. The only issue is the viability of the Defendant's selfdefense/Stand Your Ground claim.Also:
Since the June 29,2012 hearing addressed whether to reinstate the bond was not an Arthur hearing, the presentation of evidence attacking the State's case is of limited relevance at this stage of the proceedings. Nonetheless, the Court reviewed all of the exhibits and considered the witnesses' testimony regarding the Defendant's self-defense theory.
Again, he doesn't make any findings on the self-defense evidence.
Since he can't deny bond as a matter of right, he can only deny bond if he finds there are no conditions that can reasonably assure Zimmerman's appearance at trial, the safety of the community or the integrity of the judicial process.
He says danger to the community is not an issue, and while he thinks the evidence about the money could support a finding Zimmerman was preparing to flee before being released on bond, the issue he's concerned with is:
The actual questions before the Court at this time are: is the Defendant entitled to bail when he presents false testimony at a prior bond hearing and what recourse there is when the Defendant has shown blatant disregard for the judicial system.
He says of Article I, Section 18: "By its plain language, this Court is authorized to detain the Defendant without bail if it is determined that it is necessary to assure the integrity of the judicial process."
Another failure by the defense in his view: He says the defense "didn't present any witness to affirmatively state that the Defendant has not received runds from any other source."
He says "there is little authority establishing what "assure the integrity of the judicial process," as set forth in Art. I, 5 14 of the Florida Constitution, actually means in operation."
Well, there is some. Section 907.041 states:
[c]The court may order pretrial detention if it finds a substantial probability, based on a defendant’s past and present patterns of behavior, the criteria in s. 903.046, and any other relevant facts, that any of the following circumstances exists:There's no allegation Zimmerman did any of those things.2. The defendant, with the intent to obstruct the judicial process, has threatened, intimidated, or injured any victim, potential witness, juror, or judicial officer, or has attempted or conspired to do so, and that no condition of release will reasonably prevent the obstruction of the judicial process;
In any event, the Judge did agree in order to refuse to reset bond after revocation, when a defendant is constitutionally entitled for bond and has not been charged with a new crime, he must weigh all the bail release factors in Fla. Stat. 943.046(2).
[the] violation of a bond condition, without more, would not justify permanent revocation of the bond if the defendant is constitutionally entitled to a bond, The Court would still be required to conduct an analysis under Fla. Stat. 907.04 1 to determine whether a defendant is entitled to be re-released on a new bond....This Court must. then, determine the appropriate bond amount based upon the criteria set forth in Fla. Stat. 943.046(2).
He weighs all the factors, and sets bond at $1 million, which can be met through a bondsman who will charge 10% and noting that the defense fund has $211,000., finds Defendant has the ability to pay it.
Conclusion: This judge is going to have a hard time believing anything Zimmerman says in the future. At a Stand Your Ground hearing, Zimmerman will have to make his case based on the physical evidence and witness statements, since the judge is unlikely to find his testimony alone sufficient.
At trial, the Judge's opinion of his credibility will be immaterial. He clearly has enough for a self-defense instruction, and possibly for a Stand Your Ground instruction.
In an appeals case a few weeks ago, State v. Rice, a Florida appeals court confirmed that a defendant can appeal a denial of a Stand Your Ground motion before trial through a writ of prohibition. (PDF version here.)
[T]here is no question that prohibition was the appropriate relief for Rice to seek after the trial court denied his motion to dismiss based on his claim of immunity under the Stand Your Ground law.Rice was charged in November, 2008, and the writ of prohibition wasn't denied until 2010. He went to trial in January, 2011. The jury considered and rejected his Stand Your Ground claim.
Even though Judge William Wright ruled Rice wasn’t immune from prosecution under the Stand Your Ground statute, Rice still can use it as a defense [at trial.]With Zimmerman on bond, the defense will be in no hurry to take this case to trial. If it decides to appeal a denial of Stand Your Ground before trial, and the Rice case timeline is typical, it might take three years, until 2014, to get to trial in this case. By then, almost no will remember the details of this case. The impact of this bond ruling on Zimmerman's credibility at trial will be non-existent. The jurors won't have read the court's order, and reporting on the overall case will have slowed to a trickle. Any prospective juror who is so familiar with the case as to remember the details of a ruling three years earlier would certainly be bounced by one side or the other.
This was a good day for George Zimmerman, not such a great day for his defense team which just lost $100,000. in available fees, and not a good day for the state, which failed to make a sufficient case for keeping Zimmerman jailed pending trial.
| < Obama Spends July 4th With New Citizens | Thursday Morning Open Thread > |