Courts may impose 'reasonable conditions' in addition to bail

Any consequential, judicial-based changes to California's pretrial detention system must wait for a futurecase, after the state Supreme Court on Thursday ruled narrowly in a bail-related appeal that had become, in substantial part, moot.

That makes two pending high court matters, and one in particular set to determine the constitutionality of monetary bail, all the more portentous.

The petitioner in Thursday's decision, Bettie Webb, had argued she could not be required, after posting bail, to also cede her Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches as a condition of her pretrial release. The 4th District Court of Appeal agreed, finding the lower court had "neither statutory nor inherent authority" to demand such a waiver.

Subsequently, though, Webb pleaded guilty to drug-related charges and received probation, giving the Supreme Court an opening it readily took to deem the Fourth Amendment-based claim moot.

Instead the justices unanimously decided in the affirmative a simpler, more general question as to whether courts may ever place pretrial release requirements on felony defendanats who post bail.

"There is a general understanding that the trial court possesses inherent authority to impose conditions associated with release on bail," wrote Justice Ming Chin for the court. In re Webb, 2019 DJDAR 4435.

The court refrained from defining with much precision the contours of that authority, noting that it was "fairly narrow" and that conditions "must be reasonable, and there must be a sufficient nexus between the condition and the protection of public safety."

With Webb's specific claim moot, the question of whether a Fourth Amendment waiver requirement falls within such circumscribed authority remains on open, and context-dependent one.

Also uncertain is whether this ruling will retain much significance, as looming movements in the Legislature, electorate, and future court docket may radically transform or eliminate the cash bail system.

SB 10, signed by Gov. Jerry Brown last August but now on hold pending a ballot initiative challenge slated for next fall, would replace monetary bail with a risk assessment system aimed at releasing defendants based more on the danger they pose to the community and less on their ability to pay.

And, the high court itself has a chance to remake the pretrial release system, as it will soon consider a momentous 1st District Court of Appeal decision that found cash bail to violate constitutional due process and equal protection guarantees, as applied to defendants unable to afford the set bail levels. In re Humphrey, 19 Cal. App. 5th 1006 (2018).

On Thursday, the justices explicitly noted their ruling contained "no opinion regarding the recent legislation or the issues raised in Humphrey."

The court will also soon hear a third bail-related appeal, in which it will decide under what circumstances, outside of capital cases, bail can be denied altogether. In re White, 21 Cal. App. 5th 18 (2018).