TODAY IN SANTA CLARA COUNTY COURT //
CASE 1: In this defendant's case SORP was recommended by Pretrial Services. The DA, however, highlighted how the defendant had seven past FTA's. As a result, Judge Flint denied SORP and set bail at $16,000. The Public Defender did not argue against the bail amount. This Public Defender often does argue bail amounts, so I assume he either had another matter pending or that there was no way she could overcome the 7 FTA's.
CASE 2: In this case, the DA was asking for $20,000 bail, which was the scheduled bail amount. The Judge likely would have gone along with this, but when the Public Defender tried to get bail to be lowered, the Judge looked at more details and decided to raise bail to $50,000. The Judge said it was necessary to ensure appearance. The Public Defender argued for SORP saying that would be good enough for release, letting the court know that all of the defendant was previously incarcerated and that is why he had FTA's. The Public Defender assured that all of his out of county matters are resolved and he will make his court dates. The Judge still imposed an additional $30,000 bail. The Judge mentioned the defendant had a FTA, paid a $20,000 bail and then had another FTA. Judge said she was setting bail at $50,000 to ensure his appearance. It seemed like the Judge was doing this in part because the defense challenged bail and asked for SORP.
CASE 3: In this case, the Judge imposed a bail of $60,000 per the schedule, despite the fact the Pretrial Services report recommended OR. The defendant was arraigned on another matter and the Public Defender asked for both cases to be joined together. This is probably part of reason she didn't argue more for the bail to be lowered. The DA argued that one of the alleged charges increases prison exposure and asked for the scheduled bail. Despite the OR recommendation, bail was set at the $60,000.
