What
will happen at the Andrea Sneiderman Bond Hearing?
Shortly after Andrea Sneiderman's August 2,
2012, arrest, Judge Gregory Adams scheduled Sneiderman's bond hearing
for August 21, 2012. Andrea Sneiderman has been sitting in the DeKalb
County, Georgia, jail since the arrest. This post addresses the
bond hearing prior to its occurrence.
First, I have received several inquiries from
people wondering why Sneiderman's bond hearing was set 3 weeks after
her arrest instead of within 48 hours or some shorter time. In
Georgia, there is a procedure by which someone arrested for certain
crimes may be held without bail. In those circumstances, a bail
hearing need only be granted within 30 days of the arrest. It appears
that Andrea Sneiderman was held without bail, and her bail hearing
was set within 30 days of her arrest. See O.C.G.A. §17-6-1.
The next issues are what is a bond hearing, and
what can happen at a bond hearing?
A bond hearing is the procedure by which the
Court determines whether someone is “too risky” to be released
into the public. Georgia statute 17-16-1(e) provides guidelines for
the Court:
A court shall be authorized to release a person
on bail if the court finds that the person:
- Poses no significant risk of fleeing from the jurisdiction of the court or failing to appear in court when required;
- Poses no significant threat or danger to any person, to the community, or to any property in the community;
- Poses no significant risk of committing any felony pending trial; and
- Poses no significant risk of intimidating witnesses or otherwise obstructing the administration of justice.
Notice that the statute requires the Court to
find that all four requirements be met. There is a rich
history of case law providing further guidance to the Court regarding
when to permit bail. For example:
- The state/DA has the burden of persuasion by a preponderance of evidence to show that Andrea Sneiderman is not entitled to pretrial release. Constantino v. Warren, 285 Ga. 851, 853 (2009).
- A defendant who has filed a petition seeking release on bail has the initial burden of showing, by means of evidence indicating roots in the community, employment, that the defendant does not pose a significant risk of fleeing, threatening the community, committing another crime, or intimidating a witness. The defendant's guilt or innocence of the underlying charge is not an issue at the bail hearing, especially since the defendant enters the proceeding cloaked with a presumption of innocence. Cowards v. State, 266 Ga. 191, 193 (1996).
- The amount of bail to be assessed in each criminal case is generally within the sound discretion of the trial judge. When fixing the amount of bail, the judge is to consider chiefly the probability that the accused, if freed, will appear at trial; other factors to be considered include the accused's ability to pay, the seriousness of the offense, and the accused's character and reputation. Spence v. State, 252 Ga. 338, 341 (1984).
To arrive at its decision regarding bail and
pretrial release, the Court holds the bond hearing, and both the
prosecution and the defense will be permitted to call witnesses and
present other evidence in an attempt to influence the Court. Let's
look at each requirement from the statute, and opine on the possible
outcomes.
- Poses no significant risk of fleeing from the jurisdiction of the court or failing to appear in court when required.
This is the primary question whether Andrea
Sneiderman will appear at trial; is she a flight risk? Andrea
Sneiderman's attorneys are likely to argue that Sneiderman has been a
long-time resident of Georgia, was employed here, has friends and
family here, her assets have been frozen here, she does not have the
means to flee, her kids live here and that she is not a flight risk.
The DA is likely to argue that Sneiderman put
her house up for sale and no longer shows an intent to remain in
Georgia. She has lived with her parents for the past 6 months,
is currently unemployed (this is an assumption of mine), was arrested
in Putnam county, is originally from Ohio, has the financial means to flee the jurisdiction and is otherwise a flight risk.
Given
what we know, and without the benefit of additional evidence and
witnesses that may be presented at the hearing, I think it is likely
that the Court will find that Andrea Sneiderman is not a flight risk.
- Poses no significant threat or danger to any person, to the community, or to any property in the community.
I
am aware of little evidence that Andrea Sneiderman is a threat to
persons or property in the community. She does not have a criminal
record, appears to not have been in any trouble before. Perhaps
Sneiderman will call friends and family to testify on her behalf. It
would be interesting to see who they call. If I were the defense, I
would call Andy Lipman, because Rusty was one of Andy's best friends,
and Andy's character and truthfulness is unassailable. As far as
character witnesses go, Andy Lipman is the best I know in this case.
You can see Andy's blog here: http://thedriveat35.blogspot.com/
If
the DA is going to argue Sneiderman is a threat, he will concentrate
this effort with regard to witnesses, as described in #4 below.
Nevertheless, I think the likely outcome is that Sneiderman is not a
significant threat.
- Poses no significant risk of committing any felony pending trial.
You may be thinking that elements 1 and 2
overlap with 3 – and you would be right, in this case. Thus, the
same evidence used to argue Nos. 1 and 2, would likely be used to
establish that Sneiderman is not a significant risk of committing a
felony pending her trial.
- Poses no significant risk of intimidating witnesses or otherwise obstructing the administration of justice.
Here is where the proverbial rubber meets the
road. This element will likely be the focus of the DA's
argument that Andrea Sneiderman should not be released on bail. The
local media has briefly mentioned the obvious argument here: During
the Hemy Neuman trial, Andrea Sneiderman allegedly threatened Shayna
Citron, a witness. I have heard other reports that Andrea Sneiderman
visited the witness room during the HN trial and made witnesses
uncomfortable. Citron is likely to testify as she testified, outside
the presence of the jury during the HN trial, that she felt
threatened by Andrea Sneiderman.
Furthermore, usually the spouse of a murder
victim is permitted to remain in court during trial. However,
Judge Adams barred Andrea Sneiderman from not just the Court room,
but from the entire COURT HOUSE as a result of her outrageous
behavior.
The DA is going to hammer Andrea Sneiderman
with this evidence, and I would suspect the state has already
interviewed the witnesses from the Hemy Neuman trial to determine if
Andrea Sneiderman made any contact with them during or since the Hemy
Neuman trial. If so, expect them to testify at the bond hearing.
Andrea
Sneiderman's one contact with Citron may not be enough to convince
the Judge by a preponderance of evidence that Sneiderman is a
significant
risk
of intimidating witnesses or otherwise obstructing the admission of
justice, but, Sneiderman is going to have to address this evidence to
avoid staying in jail pending her trial.
As
a reminder, the Judge need only answer one of these four questions in
the affirmative in order to deny bail. If the Judge permits Andrea
Sneiderman to be released after her bond hearing, here are the
possible types of release she may receive:
- Release on Own Recognizance – Sneiderman will be released on her promise to return for hearings and trial without posting any property or assets. This is extremely unlikely.
- Unsecured Bond – Sneiderman will be released with the promise to pay a fine if she does not show up at trial. This is an unlikely outcome.
- Security Bond – Sneiderman will be released upon the posting of a bond in the amount set by the Court , commensurate with the ability to pay and to secure attendance at trial. The bond is put up by a surety (bail bondman), after Sneiderman pays 10-12% of bail amount. E.g. If bail is set at $2,000,000, then Sneiderman has to pay bondsman $200,000. If Sneiderman doesn't show up at trial, then she owes the entire bond amount to bondsman. Sureties determine the flight risk of Sneiderman and may require collateral (house, other property) as security. This is a likely outcome.
- Cash Bond – Sneiderman will be released upon the posting of a cash bond in the amount set by the Court. Sneiderman comes up with all the cash in this scenario instead of using a surety. If Sneiderman does not have all the cash perhaps her parents give it to her as a loan, gift, or advance on inheritance? This is also a likely outcome.
There has been question whether Andrea
Sneiderman can afford bail given that a reported $2.3 million in
assets has been frozen under the State's RICO statute. However,
Andrea Sneiderman reportedly had an additional $600,000+- in cash and
liquid assets, and her parents/family may also be able to help her
financially. The Judge should consider Sneiderman's ability to pay
when setting bail.
So, I hope you will tune in to the bond
hearing, and tweet or email me your questions and comments. Remember,
Rusty Sneiderman lost his life, and our justice system, with all its
flaws, is still the best system on Earth at determining the truth.
For inquiries or more information:
(404)
844-5700
Twitter
@SpeakerDave
Great post!!
ReplyDeleteThanks for the concise explanation.
ReplyDeleteCan her parents put up their home as collateral for the bail to the bondsman?
ReplyDeleteAssuming there is sufficient equity, yes. Her parents can put up their house to guarantee Andrea's won't flee.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThank you! Will be following your blog with interest.
ReplyDelete