|
|
The Judge will not Grant Bond for Me in My Michigan-Criminal-Case. What Do I Do?
Monday, March 15, 2010
The provision used by the district judge was MCR 6.106(B). Pursuant to MCR 6.106(B)(4), the arraigning magistrate must specifically state the reasons for denying pretrial release. Here, there were no specific reasons stated, other than a reference to the charges against the accused. In this case, the citizen was charged with 2 counts of criminal sexual conduct in the 1st degree, a life offense. Finding that an accused citizen is not entitled to pretrial release based on the nature of the charges does not comply with the court rule. MCR 6.106(B)(4) is clear that the court “must state the reason for an order of custody on the record” (emphasis added). This is requirement is not discretionary, but is mandatory per the specific wording of the court rule. By failing to comply with the court rule and articulate why the evidence is strong or the presumption was great, the arraigning magistrate abused his discretion.
Judges in DUI cases are often ordering substance abuse evaluations in situations in which there is a prior conviction. The court rule specifically allows for the court to order an assessment. However, be very careful to make sure that the evaluation/assessment is not released to anyone except for your lawyer until your lawyer decides that it is in your best interest to disclose the document. An article on bond and drunk driving is available at MichiganDUIDefender.com