Photo: Morgan Trau.
A bill introduced by Ohio Republicans would restrict nonprofits like The Bail Project from paying bail, punish criminals who fail to show up in court and allow the state to get involved if a judge sets bail that is “too low.”
During a press conference Wednesday morning, state Reps. DJ Swearingen, R-Huron, and Jeff LaRe, R-Violet Township, introduced a modern bail reform package accompanied by Holly, a victim Brawl in Cincinnati from last summer.
Holly, who was speaking at the event, was injured in the brawl, which attracted national attention. She said the man arrested for hitting her was free on bail at the time.
“Many of you have seen the viral video, but you haven’t seen the aftermath: the injuries, the hospital visits, the fear,” she said.
In another case of someone who was out on bail and committed a crime, an attorney at a press conference brought up the December shooting at the Cleveland RTA.
Just five days after posting bail, Donnie Allen was arrested on suspicion of shooting and killing a man.
“It’s really hard to accept it because it could have been prevented,” Holly said.
Swearingen agreed and said both crimes should not have happened.
“Those low bail amounts or just bail at all may not work,” he said. “And they fail because they do not adequately take into account the fact that the person receiving bail should not be released from prison at all.”
The 27-page bill aims to protect the community while not violating the suspect’s rights, lawmakers added. It’s called “Holly’s Law.”
The bill increases the consequences of repeated violations.
If the defendant fails to appear in a current case or has failed to appear on at least two summonses in the last five years, the required deposit will raise from 10% to 25%.
“Personal recognition is not an option,” LaRe said.
Courts will also be required to confirm that the bail bondsman is financially responsible for the full bail amount before approving it.
Once the forfeiture of a property guarantee is confirmed, the court cannot restore the security of that guarantee.
If a judge decides not to refuse bail for a “serious offence”, he must explain why.
The main provision of the bill would restrict non-profit organizations from assisting with the repayment of deposits in certain cases.
“The law prohibits charities from providing bail for serious and violent crimes, including domestic violence,” LaRe said.
Under the bill, nonprofits such as The Bail Project would not be allowed to pay a deposit of more than $5,000.
The original bail for Allen charged in the RTA shooting was set at $15,000, but a judge lowered it to $5,000. The Bail Project paid 10% for its release.
The organization’s Jeremy Cherson did not comment on the case, but said the expansive majority of people helped follow the law.
“Whenever an unfortunate event occurs, we will make sure we understand what happened and we will take stock of what happened, but I would just like to point out that these are rare events,” Cherson said. “We shouldn’t be legislating on the margins.”
Lawmakers were asked if they had data on how often a suspect goes out on bail and commits additional violent crimes.
They said they would check it out, but they didn’t know.
Cherson said bail bonds could be discriminatory.
Public defenders routinely argue that the system makes him “guilty until proven wealthy,” in which a wealthy defendant can pay his way out of prison, as opposed to someone with less money who would remain locked up and awaiting trial.
“There is no equal justice for all,” Kherson said. “It’s justice only for the rich.”
He added that the Bail Project showed that the underlying charge is “not necessarily an indicator” of whether an individual will or will not return to court or will pose a risk if released.”
Cherson added that about 20% of their clients end up with their cases dismissed.
“This means that if it were not for our intervention, they would have been unnecessarily imprisoned,” he said.
However, legislators argued that these would be selected cases of violence that usually involve recidivists.
“Well, first I would point out that the judge is the person who has the most information about the case, about the person’s history, and makes a decision based on the assumption that the person can pay, and if they pay, they are eligible for release,” Cherson said after being asked what type of checks the organization conducts.
“We only intervene once the judge has made that decision based on all the information available to him, and then we carefully assess what is happening to the person.”
Sometimes people fall into the trap, he admitted, but most people don’t.
“We have served over 2,700 people in Ohio and they have returned to court 95% of the time,” he added.
“This shows that this is not a necessary incentive to keep the justice system functioning in the way we hope and to ensure accountability for those credibly accused of the crimes they are accused of.”
Cherson said the real way to fix the criminal justice system and promote public safety is not to prevent aid from the Bail Project, but to address the issues of why a person may be incarcerated.
“They are cycling in and out of prison, sometimes for non-violent crimes, misdemeanors that are often related to untreated mental illness, addiction or homelessness, and that type of cycling is not solved by their continued incarceration,” Cherson said.
He said that responsibility is critical and that everyone needs to feel sheltered.
“However, we must also take into account the people who suffer unnecessary harm when we apply legislation that is too strict and not necessarily necessary to too wide a range of people,” he said.
But in addition to eliminating the ability to pay, the bill also allows the attorney general to appeal judges’ bail decisions if the state deems them too low.
Swearingen responded that this is a current debate about balancing the bill with free speech or lawmakers overreaching into matters of justice.
“The goal is to enable judges to identify key elements of defendants that make them a threat to public safety, and we want to work with them to achieve this,” Swearingen said. “We don’t try to overstep or micromanage them in any way.”
The bail discussion has been widely discussed in Ohio.
Issue 1, passed by an overwhelming majority in 2022, specifies whether judges should be required to consider public safety when setting bail amounts.
The proposal amended the Constitution to require Ohio courts to consider public safety, a person’s criminal record, the defendant’s likelihood of returning to court, and any other factors decided by the Ohio General Assembly when setting bail.
Swearingen and LaRe also led Issue 1.
Ohio House Speaker Matt Huffman, R-Lima, was unaware of the legislation when asked about his thoughts.
He said he did not know if there was an appetite for reforms and they “certainly” did not intend to do anything with the bill by the end of the month.
He added that there will be more to see in May or June.
Follow WEWS statehouse reporter Morgan Trau X AND Facebook.
This article was originally published on News5Cleveland.com and are published in the Ohio Capital Journal under a content sharing agreement. Unlike other OCJ articles, it is not available for free republication on other news outlets because it is owned by WEWS in Cleveland.
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.
