What should I expect at my Dangerousness Hearing?

A dangerousness hearing is held to determine whether or not you are a flight risk, or a danger to the community at large. The outcome of this hearing will determine whether you will be allowed to post bail or be held without bail.

The factors that a judge will take into consideration at a dangerousness hearing include:

• the type of crime and the circumstances around the offense

• ties to the community you may having including family, career, and obligations

• your mental and physical health, as well as your reputation in the community

• if you have a criminal record or prior convictions the nature of past offenses will be considered

• the statutory sentence guidelines for the crime

• whether you have any addictions or substance abuse history

• whether you have had any prior bail violations or violations of a court order involving the current crime

• any parole or probation violations

• an assessment of the risk involved in allowing you to be released, the severity of any danger present to the community or risk to interference in the investigation into the current crime

Even if your crime is minor and you feel there would not be concern for the judge to hold you without bail, it is important to obtain the advice of a Criminal Defense Attorney prior to your dangerousness hearing. If you need the assistance of an experienced and qualified Dangerousness Hearing attorney, contact John L. Calcagni at (401) 351-5100 now for a free consultation.

Arrest Warrant Client Testimonial

If you have been arrested or are facing criminal charges in RI or MA, contact John L. Calcagni at (401) 351-5100 now for a free consultation or more information.

“Attorney Calcagni honestly and truly made a difference in my life. He helped me vacate four different arrest warrants in a manner that prevented me from going to jail and closed out all of my cases with no additional punishment. I cannot explain with words the sincere gratitude that I have for the expert legal representation he provided to me. He is an awesome attorney. I will never hesitate to recommend him to anyone. It is my pleasure to pass along my great experience with him to others.” - MC

Wrongful Conviction Reform Essay

 

In the wake of the execution of Troy Davis under what appear to be questionable evidentiary circumstances, the following essay discusses the idea that changes can be made to decrease the incidence of wrongful convictions.

If you have been charged with a crime in RI or MA, contact Criminal Defense Attorney John L. Calcagni at (401) 351-5100 or use the contact form HERE for more information.

Thomas on Avoiding Conviction of Innocents

George C. Thomas III (Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey - School of Law-Newark) has posted Two Windows into Innocence (Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, Vol. 7, p. 575, Spring 2010) on SSRN.

Here is the abstract:

Stories about innocent defendants who serve many years in prison before they are conclusively exonerated by DNA testing are by now sadly familiar. Although the reaction of policy makers has so far been strangely muted, there are concrete steps that can be taken to reduce the risk of wrongful convictions at an acceptable cost. This essay examines two relatively modest but important changes that some states have made and recommends that they be made more broadly. According to the Cardozo Innocence Project, the single most common cause of wrongful convictions is mistaken eyewitness identifications. States like New Jersey and North Carolina have implemented fundamental changes in eyewitness procedures that include keeping records of the procedure and requiring the eyewitness to indicate the degree of certainty. The essay recommends these and other reforms that will help protect innocent defendants. The other “window into innocence” is to permit criminal defendants to discover the State’s case in much the same manner as civil litigants are permitted to discover the other party’s case. Florida has had a liberal criminal discovery policy since 1972 without evidence of undue burdens on victims or costs to administer the process. Ten other states permit criminal discovery either as a matter of right or by leave of the court. Though liberal criminal discovery does potentially burden victims, there are ways of ameliorating that burden. One can argue that all defendants have a right to discover the State’s case but that argument has particular cogency when the defendant is factually innocent of the crime charged when defendants. When defendants make a threshold showing of innocence, the paper argues, the State should pay the defense lawyer’s time to take depositions of the State’s witnesses.

Bail Petitions to Massachusetts Superior Court

 

Bail is typically defined as some sort of property promised to the court in order to secure a suspect’s release from jail. The agreement carries with it the understanding that the suspect will return for trial on the date specified by the Court, or will lose the bail initially posted, and possibly be brought up on charges for failure to appear as well.

In some cases, if a defendant appears for every hearing the bail may be returned at the close of the trial, whether the person has been found guilty or not guilty of the crime accused. Under current bail law, the court is allowed to detain a suspect prior to a trial based upon how dangerous they may be to the community rather than the previous criteria of being a flight risk. This is determined at a dangerousness hearing.

If you are facing a bail hearing for a major crime or serious felony in Massachusetts Superior Court then you need the assistance of a qualified and experienced bail petition criminal Attorney who will successfully and aggressively fight for your rights. Bail is not always granted and often must be argued for these types of charges.