Alden v. State

The modified bond conditions that the trial court imposed after the defendant failed to appear at his arraignment and bond forfeiture hearings did not constitute punishment prohibiting his subsequent prosecution for DUI, driving with a suspended license and a traffic offense.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Mark Allen Alden appeals the denial of his plea in bar based upon double jeopardy, arguing that the imposition of certain bond conditions was punishment, and that any further prosecution is prohibited under the double jeopardy clause of the Georgia Constitution and the Fifth Amendment of the United States. We affirm, for the reasons that follow. On November 1, 2008, Alden was arrested and issued citations for driving under the influence of alcohol with an illegal alcohol concentration “DUI per se”, driving with a suspended license, and failure to maintain his lane. He was released from jail on a $2,200 bond and instructed that it was his responsibility to notify the court of any address changes and to keep informed of his court dates. On February 2, 2009, the State filed an accusation charging Alden with DUI per se,1 driving under the influence of alcohol to the extent that he was a less safe driver “DUI less safe”,2 driving with a suspended license,3 and failure to maintain his lane.4

On March 10, 2009, the trial court issued a bench warrant for Alden’s arrest based on his failure to appear at his March 3, 2009 arraignment. On July 7, 2009, Alden failed to appear for a bond forfeiture hearing, and the trial court issued a judgment of bond forfeiture. Alden was subsequently taken into custody pursuant to the arrest warrant,5 and counsel filed a speedy trial demand on March 31, 2010, various discovery motions, and a motion to set bond shortly thereafter. On April 14, 2010, the trial court granted Alden a bond in the amount of $15,000 with the following conditions: Alden was placed on home confinement, had an ignition interlock device placed on his vehicle, was required to wear a “Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol Monitor” “SCRAM device”, and was required to submit to a drug and alcohol evaluation and to follow any treatment recommendations.

Alden v. State

The modified bond conditions that the trial court imposed after the defendant failed to appear at his arraignment and bond forfeiture hearings did not constitute punishment prohibiting his subsequent prosecution for DUI, driving with a suspended license and a traffic offense.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report