Editorial: Pretrial detention rules need time to show results - Albuquerque Journal

Editorial: Pretrial detention rules need time to show results

A federal judge’s recent decision keeps in place – for now – the state Supreme Court’s new pretrial detention rules, crafted to help judges determine whether defendants should be detained until their trial, released on their own recognizance or released with specific conditions.

And that’s a good thing.

Because under the old system, judges by law were supposed to require “reasonable bail” for all but a very few crimes. That meant repeat drug traffickers could go free as long as their money man anted up some cash to a bondsman, while petty criminals would remain in jail because they couldn’t afford to pay a bond.

In contrast, the new rules allow judges to keep dangerous defendants in jail without bond pending trial. They allow judges to release other defendants with conditions, including ankle bracelets and other monitoring. And they allow judges to release defendants accused of low-level, non-violent crimes, instead of keeping them behind bars because they can’t scrape up a mere $50 or so for bail.

While bail bondsmen are understandably unhappy that many defendants will no longer require their services, the new rules are far preferable and vastly fairer – when implemented correctly – than the old system of having judges often base pretrial release decisions on how much money a defendant has, or whether his family or friends will sign over enough collateral to have a bondsman post the bond.

Because shouldn’t public safety and flight risk, not financial assets, drive who’s in jail and who isn’t?

A handful of state senators, representatives of the bond industry and a defendant who was incarcerated for several days under the new rules recently sought a preliminary injunction as part of a lawsuit to suspend the rules. The defendants in the lawsuit, which include judges and court officials, have filed a motion to dismiss it.

This month, Senior U.S. District Judge Robert Junnell denied the preliminary injunction.

It was the right move.

Remember, the new rules were developed after voters overwhelmingly approved an amendment to the state Constitution. The Bernalillo County Metropolitan Court and 2nd Judicial District Court began using the rules implementing the amendment June 12.

Since then, the amendment and the new rules have been blamed for the release of some repeat offenders who many believe are a clear danger to the public.

If anything, the amendment gives the judges more leeway to keep serious offenders behind bars.

But as with any new system, some education, communication and adjustments are in order as judges try to interpret the rules.

A key would be tracking which suspects released under the new rules ever show up in court or re-offend while awaiting trial; that’s something the courts need to do and report back to the public.

The amendment passed at least in part because New Mexicans, and especially police officers, were undeniably sick of the “revolving door” that let criminals of most any ilk post bond and get back on the streets the next day, only to continue their burglaries, car thefts, assaults, drug trafficking, etc.

And New Mexicans should be sick of a locked door that kept first-time offenders and petty criminals away from the families, jobs and support systems that can get them on a better path.

Last year, New Mexico voters said “enough is enough” and approved enabling legislation for a new pretrial release system aimed at keeping the right people in jail. Now it’s up to the judges – keeping in mind the public’s safety – to make sure the right people stay in jail.

This editorial first appeared in the Albuquerque Journal. It was written by members of the editorial board and is unsigned as it represents the opinion of the newspaper rather than the writers.


Albuquerque Journal and its reporters are committed to telling the stories of our community.

• Do you have a question you want someone to try to answer for you? Do you have a bright spot you want to share?
   We want to hear from you. Please email yourstory@abqjournal.com

Nativo Sponsored Content

taboola desktop

MORE ARTICLES LIKE THIS

1
Editorial: NM has made strides to rein in bad ...
Editorials
Three weeks after court approval of ... Three weeks after court approval of an emergency petition immediately turned Dorris Hamilton's ...
2
Editorial: NMSU spreads cheer, lets folks clear tickets in ...
Editorials
It's literally spreading holiday cheer, allowing ... It's literally spreading holiday cheer, allowing folks to clear parking tickets with a donatio ...
3
Editorial: Pastor's endorsement of candidate merits probe
Editorials
Albuquerque megachurch leader Steve Smothermon has ... Albuquerque megachurch leader Steve Smothermon has been no stranger to controversy throughout the pa ...
4
Editorial: Residents need ongoing police reform and accountability, not ...
Editorials
It's not that long ago that ... It's not that long ago that the administration of Mayor Tim Keller pronounced itself a partner ...
5
Editorial: Literacy emergency not the time to halt proven ...
Editorials
If not now, then when? If ... If not now, then when? If we're not in an education emergency, what constitu ...
6
Editorial: Lame-duck council flirts with a bad idea
Editorials
Blinded by dollar signs and eyeing ... Blinded by dollar signs and eyeing a path to deliver an enormous infrastructure package ahea ...
7
Editorial: Today is about giving
Editorials
With Black Friday, Small Business Saturday ... With Black Friday, Small Business Saturday and Cyber Monday behind us, it's time to remember t ...
8
Editorial: NM's working families and businesses need a cure ...
Editorials
Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham's proposal to ... Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham's proposal to shave one-quarter of one percentage point off the st ...
9
NM justices deal win for democracy, blow to overreach
Editorials
Yes, Virginia, there are three branches ... Yes, Virginia, there are three branches of state government. The state Supreme Cou ...