Some counties vow to continue zero bail, after state lifts emergency order

The no cash bail experiment will continue in some parts of the state.

On Tuesday night, Alameda County Superior Court adopted a modified zero bail schedule in what appears to be the first court response to the Judicial Council's repeal of its statewide emergency bail schedule.

A day later, Sacramento County Superior Court announced it too would continue with a zero bail schedule.

The Los Angeles County Superior Court might soon follow. The court's executive committee will consider adopting a revised bail schedule on Friday, according to Public Information Officer Mary Hearn.

The statewide suspension of cash bail, ordered by California Chief Justice Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye on April 6, was repealed in a 17-2 vote last week. Its sunset date of June 20 is when courts will revert to their standard bail schedules, unless they follow the lead of Alameda and Sacramento.

Alameda's and Sacramento's revised bail schedules are nearly spitting images of the Judicial Council's. They set bail at zero for most misdemeanor and felony offenses. And they give judges the authority to deny bail under Article I, Section 28(f)(3) of the California Constitution.

However, Alameda added two exemptions to the council's list of 13 offenses that don't qualify for zero bail -- human trafficking (PC 236.1) and any misdemeanor or felony violation alleged to have been committed by a defendant who was released on their own recognizance, zero bail or other monetary bail.

The court said these offenses were included because the sentencing consequences associated with them -- up to 15 years to life for human trafficking -- are sometimes more serious than some offenses the council exempted from its statewide schedule.

Bail for human trafficking offenses will be set at $250,000, according to the county's 2020 bail schedule.

Sacramento County Presiding Judge Russel L. Hom's Wednesday order retaining the council's emergency bail schedule has just one addition. The court will exempt defendants accused of reckless evading of a peace officer (Vehicle Code 2800.2) from qualifying for zero bail.

Alameda County has toyed with a model that resembles a no cash bail system since January when the superior court implemented a risk assessment pilot program to identify criminal defendants who would be safe to release pretrial.

Following last week's vote to end the statewide schedule, the court said it decided the ongoing health risks and resource restraints associated with the pandemic did not warrant an immediate return to the county's standard bail schedule.

District Attorney Nancy O'Malley said last week she felt the council's bail schedule struck "the right balance between public health concerns with COVID-19 and protection of the public." A spokesperson for her office said Wednesday that law enforcement officials will still submit a declaration electronically to a judge requesting bail in a zero bail case "if there were unique circumstances that might warrant bail being set."

Public Defender Brendon Woods could not be reached for comment Wednesday. But he urged the council in the days leading up to its vote to keep the emergency schedule through the end of the year to keep jail populations low to limit the spread of the virus.

It's unclear how other courts plan to move forward after this week.

Riverside County Superior Court has not reached a decision on whether to return to its standard bail schedule, according to David Gutknecht, deputy executive officer of administration.

A spokesperson said Wednesday the Orange County Superior Court has not decided what action it will take once the statewide order expires.

No sunset date is listed in Alameda's and Sacramento's orders.