Topic - TOP - Ear rings Sportswear Sale Auto Free mp3 ringtones Boats Mobiles Pills, Compare pills, Reviews pills Phentermine No Prescription Medical tests Loan Online Adipex online FDA Approved Pharmacy Sport Betting Cars Cheap pharmacy shop Trousers Medicine news Dating ya.by Ambien online Get ringtones online Best Ringtones Evening dress Hydrocodone online Underwear Tunings Soma online Replica Rolex Valium online Credits Yachts Intimate goods Download Ringtones Rington Ladies handbag Credit Tramadol online Blog Search the Web Cigarette Suits Top casino auto-moto Tables Free Ringtones Cheap drugs online shop Green Card Information Fioricet online Online notebook shop Xanax online Boots Building materials Chronometer Autos Vicodin online Free Ringtones Balans Rolex Replica Chairs Cialis online furniture

Criticism of Billings Municipal Court & pretrial supervision

Filed under:Judges, Misdemeanor Practice, Pretrial — posted by tc on May 5, 2007 @ 3:58 pm

This is old news but for the record, the Montana News Association (MNA) ran a story in March criticizing Billings Municipal Court Judge Mary Jane Knisely for ordering too many people to sign up and pay for pretrial supervision. Although I agree that pretrial supervision is being abused in Billings municipal court, at least one of the complaints of the MNA appears to be a bit misguided. The MNA suggest that the statutory authority for pretrial supervision gives the court authority to order such supervision only in PFMA or stalking cases. The MNA writes that:

Judge Mary Jane Knisely regularly orders defendants charged with non-PFMA or stalking-related offenses to pretrial supervision, which costs them, easily, hundreds of extra dollars, in addition to the costs they have to pay, if they are found guilty.

The only statutory authority for pretrial supervision (as far as I know) comes from 46-9-108(1)(f), MCA, where it is listed as one of many conditions a court may impose in order to “reasonably ensure the appearance of the defendant as required or that will ensure the safety of any person or the community.” Thus, the statute does authorize pretrial supervision for any bailable offense.

That said, it is absolutely true that far, far too many people who face charges in Billings Municipal Court are being ordered to submit to pretrial supervision, and it is also true that the private pretrial supervision agencies charge unconscionable fees for their “services.” The MNA’s other criticisms of these private agencies — e.g. that they bully and threaten their clients and conduct random UAs and BAs w/out authority to do so (in order to make more money, no doubt) — certainly seem accurate, as well.

UPDATE: See also: Pre-trial supervision fees unfair and counterproductive

2 comments »

  1. The ‘update’ here goes to a letter that I recall reading in the Gazette pages a few weeks ago. At the time I was astounded that such a practice is allowed in America, let alone in Montana. What’s in it for a Judge to go along with this egregious violation of a poor person’s rights?

    Comment by Patricia Herrick — May 20, 2007 @ 11:08 am

  2. [...] isn’t the first time this court has received this kind of criticism (see also), and it won’t be the [...]

    Pingback by Fight ‘Em ‘Til We Can’t » Billings Municipal Court — December 8, 2007 @ 5:01 pm

Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post or for TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)




image: detail of installation by Bronwyn Lace