Rick Bowmer, Associated Press

SALT LAKE CITY — A bail reform compromise bill, neither loved nor hated by those closely involved in its writing, surfaced in the Legislature and gained near-unanimous approval Wednesday.

“At its core, this bill moves us away from wealth-based pretrial detention and toward a pretrial process that focuses on risk,” said Rep. Stephanie Pitcher, D-Salt Lake City, a Davis County prosecutor who sponsored the bill during a legislative special session.

Pitcher also sponsored House Bill 206 in 2020, which took a major step toward a more risk-based system. But after the Utah Sheriffs’ Association contended the bill soon resulted in some dangerous arrestees being released, lawmakers during the 2021 general session repealed HB 206. That resulted in creation of a work group to further dig into the contentious issue.

Pitcher told the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday that the new measure, House Bill 2003, will create “a rational relationship between those risk factors and pretrial release conditions that should be imposed.”

The bill says judges should conduct individualized reviews and impose release conditions on arrestees that are necessary to ensure court appearances, public safety and the safety of witnesses and victims. “If a financial condition is imposed, the judge must consider the ability to pay before setting the amount,” she said. Release conditions include random drug and alcohol testing, curfews and regularly checking in with pretrial services.

Image supplied, Utah Legislature

Further, the bill creates a pilot program to better assess an arrestee’s financial status early in the process so more accurate decisions are made upon whether the arrestee will be assigned a public defender or need to hire counsel.

Representatives of defense attorney, prosecutor and bail bonds associations spoke in favor of the bill, as did Cache County Sheriff Chad Jensen, president of the Utah Sheriffs’ Association.

“I think we’ve all found weaknesses in our own respective pieces of the justice system and are looking forward to fixing those weaknesses,” Jensen said. “And who would have ever thought the police and defense attorneys could be best friends?” he added, drawing chuckles.

The impetus for bail reform rode on a wave of growing concern that too many low-income, nonviolent arrestees become stuck in jail awaiting trial because they cannot afford bail. On the other end of the spectrum, some people accused of violent crimes have gone free before trial because they could afford high bail.

“I think each of our groups are going to have complaints from our members about how it’s not perfect or it failed to contemplate this or that,” said Steve Burton, head of the Utah Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. “Really what happened at the end is we just all in good faith came together and tried to reach a compromise that everybody could live with. It helps create a more fair system than we had before.”

HB 2003 sailed to House passage on a 71-0 vote Wednesday afternoon and the Senate followed with a vote of 26-1, sending the bill to Gov. Spencer Cox for his signature.

The lone “no” vote was cast by Sen. John D. Johnson, R-Ogden. Asked Thursday about why he voted against the bill, Johnson said he had no comment.

“I don’t think anyone got everything they wanted,” HB 2003’s Senate floor sponsor, Sen. Todd Weiler, R-Woods Cross, said during debate, noting the history of fiery debate about bail before this compromise.

He said moving away from a strict cash bail system to one with robust pretrial risk reviews is especially warranted because about 80% of Utah arrestees can’t afford bail.

“They sit in jail waiting for trial, and during COVID that could be a year or two, or do they get released before they’ve been convicted and go home to their families and their jobs, etcetera?” Weiler said.

Newsletter