Con Law Q Forum

[clshopeful]

Havent taken Con law yet, but still interested in this question, and cant find an answer.

When you are held (for sometimes even a year) before trial starts, isnt that unconstitutional? Like OJ Simpson; he was indicted, and then held for a year (right?) before his trial began. Arent we presumed innocent? Or is it allowed once youre indicted, and pose a serious threat (thus no bail given), the court has the right to confine you?

George Zimmerman was in jail the entire time while the prosecution gathered evidence and did the trial. He was found not guilty, but he spent a year in jail. Isn't this unconstitutional?

[A. Nony Mouse]

Not unconstitutional. Under the Bail Reform Act of 1984, if you're charged with a crime, you're entitled to release pending trial unless the court finds (based on a number of factors) that you pose a danger to the community, or you are a flight risk and unlikely to appear for future proceedings, or both. The more serious the crime and potential penalty, the more likely that a court will find you're a danger or flight risk. Bail is one option, but it may not be enough to protect the community/ensure your appearance - depends on things like your ties to the community.

(This is for federal crimes, but the states will all have some variation on this.)

Edit: Zimmerman was actually originally released on bond and electronic monitoring, but was later taken into custody on the grounds that he and his wife had lied about their finances in the bond hearing. He then had a second bond hearing and was released again on a higher bond. So he didn't sit in prison until trial. OJ was held without bail pending trial because of the whole fleeing-from-police thing. (Thank you wikipedia.)

[clshopeful]

I thank you for satiating my curiosity.

[GreenEggs]

You won't learn that in con law, you'll have to take a specific class if you're interested in this topic.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Yeah it's more crim pro. Crim pro actually involves a ton of con law, but it's not part of con law courses.

[Avian]

You also have a right to a speedy trial. Generally under federal law the information or indictment must be filed within 30 days of arrest or summons, and the trial must commence within 70 days of the indictment or information being filed. Time that would count against this is often excluded, for example to engage in negotiations or to give both sides time to file pretrial motions. The defendant gets credit for time spent in a federal prison waiting for trial if they are convicted.

[Auxilio]

As a mostly off topic question,

Thoughts on the (previous) system that was in place in Canada where due to the questionable basis of holding them in prison before verdict time spent before trial was credited at 2:1?

[Avian]

As a mostly off topic question,

Thoughts on the (previous) system that was in place in Canada where due to the questionable basis of holding them in prison before verdict time spent before trial was credited at 2:1?

Seems kind of pointless assuming everyone knows that and it is taken into account when determining sentences, either by the legislature or the judge. The only person that will apply to is someone who is convicted, because the person who is found innocent will be released immediately.

[Auxilio]

As a mostly off topic question,

Thoughts on the (previous) system that was in place in Canada where due to the questionable basis of holding them in prison before verdict time spent before trial was credited at 2:1?

Seems kind of pointless assuming everyone knows that and it is taken into account when determining sentences, either by the legislature or the judge. The only person that will apply to is someone who is convicted, because the person who is found innocent will be released immediately.

Don't forget it also serves as a strong imperative to give them a speedy trial.

[Avian]

As a mostly off topic question,

Thoughts on the (previous) system that was in place in Canada where due to the questionable basis of holding them in prison before verdict time spent before trial was credited at 2:1?

Seems kind of pointless assuming everyone knows that and it is taken into account when determining sentences, either by the legislature or the judge. The only person that will apply to is someone who is convicted, because the person who is found innocent will be released immediately.

Don't forget it also serves as a strong imperative to give them a speedy trial.

I suppose. It seems better to have a rule actually targeted at that rather than assuming that the judge is going to be concerned about someone getting out too early.