People are fed up and want more protection—Hinds

Chester Hinds

The Office of the Attorney General’s Criminal Division has heard time and time again that the community wants more protection against repeat offenders and the OAG believes passing the Bail Reform Act would provide that.

Chief prosecutor Chester Hinds, who heads the division, said he supports the proposed Keisha King Bail Reform Act, believing it’s a step in the right direction for the CNMI.

“I understand that there’s a lot of concern that a defendant’s rights will be taken away, but I don’t think that that’s the case with this bill. This bill is actually trying to strike a balance between a defendant’s rights and protecting the community,” he said.

Time and time again, Hinds said, the CNMI community has sought more protection against repeat offenders who are out on bail and the OAG believes that the Bail Reform Act strikes a balance between protecting the community and preserving an individual’s rights.

“People in the community are fed up; they want more protection. They want the judges to do more; they want the OAG to do more; they want the Department of Public Safety to do more. This bill helps give the judges and the OAG the ability to keep repeat offenders in custody,” he said.

“So when someone gets arrested and they already have a record, they might be on probation or they have a criminal record from the past for a violent offense, these are the kinds of defendants that the community doesn’t want to see back out again. They obviously could hurt someone else and this bill is going to help with that,” Hinds added.

He explained that the bill still preserves an individual’s rights because it doesn’t call for a judge to deny bail outright. Instead, the bill requires the OAG’s Criminal Division to file a motion to deny bail along with evidence, and a hearing is held before a judge who decides whether or not denial of bail is warranted.

“The court cannot outright deny bail; that cannot happen. Regardless of what offense you’re arrested for, outside of murder, you can get bail but this gives the court the ability to decide, ‘You’re a repeat offender. …We’re going to deny bail based on your history.’ If this legislation is passed, the court must give the prosecution an opportunity to present evidence and file for a motion to deny bail. If we are able to present their criminal record, what kind of crime it was, and if we can prove with the preponderance of evidence that this person should be denied bail, then the court can deny bail. This law does not take away the court’s discretion,” he said.

In addition, Hinds said the legislation also requires that the prosecution is given a 24-hour notice of a bail modification. That’s not the case right now, as bail modification can happen at any time. During this time, the prosecution can file their motion if they believe the person should be denied bail or not.

Hinds believes that the bill, in its current language, is reasonable and fair.

“I don’t agree that this legislation is unconstitutional. I think other jurisdictions have something similar to this bill. This is not to overstep in anyway. It just provides a balance between a defendant’s rights and protecting the community from repeat offenders. The judge isn’t just going to deny bail just because. This legislation requires that a hearing is held, the prosecution was given a chance to present a motion and evidence, it isn’t an automatic denial. If it was, then I could see the argument that it’s unconstitutional but that’s not the case,” he said.

The Office of the Public Defender and a group of private lawyers are opposed to the bill.