Opinion
363937
12-07-2022
People of Michigan v. Candace Nicole Murry
LC No. 21-007047-01-FH
Noah P. Hood Presiding Judge, Christopher M. Murray, Michael J. Riordan Judges
ORDER
The motion for immediate consideration is GRANTED.
The motion to review bail pursuant to MCR 6.106(H) is GRANTED, and the matter REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this order. Pretrial release of an accused is a constitutional right. 1963 Const, art 1, § 15; People v Edmond, 81 Mich.App. 743, 747; 266 N.W.2d 640 (1978). See also MCL 765.6. "Money bail is excessive if it is in an amount greater than reasonably necessary to adequately assure that the accused will appear when his [or her] presence is required." Edmond, 81 Mich.App. at 747-748. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by determining that money bail was appropriate under these circumstances, see MCR 6.106(E) and (F). While the trial court discussed relevant considerations in setting the $250,000 bail, the amount of bail was not tethered to the relevant considerations. See MCL 765.6(1)(a); MCR 6.106(F). A prior $10,000 bond was set and defendant appeared at all court dates save one during the time in which that bail amount existed. An increase of the bond to $250,000, without any new evidence establishing a flight risk or additional crimes committed, appears geared more to ensuring defendant remains in jail than to ensure she appear at future hearings. As such, the trial court abused its discretion by imposing an excessive bail amount which is not reasonably necessary to ensure defendant's appearance. The matter is remanded for reconsideration of the amount of defendant's bail, with consideration given to factors enumerated in MCL 765.6(1) and MCR 6.106(D), (E) and (F). Proceedings on remand shall be conducted within 7 days of the Clerk's certification of this order.
To the extent defendant asks this Court to direct that the case be assigned to a different judge on remand, the request is DENIED. Defendant has not overcome the heavy presumption of judicial impartiality. See TT v KL, 334 Mich.App. 413, 431; 965 N.W.2d 101 (2020).
This order shall have immediate effect. MCR 7.215(F)(2). We do not retain jurisdiction.