Phila. Courts Revoke Policy Allowing It to Retain 30 Percent of Cash Bail Deposit
Pennsylvania's largest court system, the First Judicial District, has revoked a controversial policy that allowed the court to retain nearly one-third of a defendant's cash bail deposit after their case was fully resolved.
October 10, 2018 at 05:12 PM
3 minute read
(Photo: Jason Doiy/ALM)
Pennsylvania's largest court system, the First Judicial District, has revoked a controversial policy that allowed the court to retain nearly one-third of a defendant's cash bail deposit after their case was fully resolved.
On Wednesday, Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas President Judge Sheila Woods-Skipper issued an order amending its rules to say that, if a defendant is compliant with the bail conditions, bail deposits should be returned in full after a criminal case has been resolved. The previous policy allowed the court to retain 30 percent of a defendant's cash bail after a case was disposed, and said that any funds that were not claimed with 180 days would be deemed forfeit to the court.
In the one-page order issued Wednesday, Woods-Skipper cited the court's work with Philadelphia City Council's Special Committee on Criminal Justice Reform and its work helping to manage a multimillion-dollar MacArthur Foundation grant. The change, the order said, was made based on a best practices review by the FJD and the Criminal Justice Advisory Board.
“The court concludes that the interests of justice would be best served if the entire amount of cash bail deposited to secure the defendant's release were to be refunded in those cases where the defendant fully complied with the principal purpose of bail,” Woods-Skipper said.
The new rule does allow the court to designate “a minimum sum of money” that can be retained if the defendant does not appear at all the required hearings. A comment to the rule says the retention figure is 30 percent of the deposited amount or 3 percent of the total amount of bail, but the maximum amount of retained money should not exceed $1,500.
The order said it takes effect immediately.
Philadelphia's policy recently came under fire after PhiladelphiaWeekly.com published an article focusing on the practice, as well as other fees and costs the court levies on defendants.
According to the Philadelphia Weekly article, bail fees put $2.9 million into the city's general fund for 2018. The article also noted that talks have been in place about reversing the court's bail retention practices, and the 2019 budget, which passed in June, accounted for the dip in revenue.
In an email Wednesday, Woods-Skipper said the changes have been in the works since 2016, and that the court does not retain any of the fees, but rather they are paid in full to the city.
“The city has represented that the loss of this revenue will not adversely impact the budget of criminal justice entities funded by the city, including the court,” Woods-Skipper said in an email Wednesday.
Woods-Skipper said that, along with alleviating the negative financial impacts, the court also expects that the change may increase the appearance rate of defendants, which will also expedite the disposition of the underlying charges.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Stevens & Lee Hires Ex-Middle District of Pennsylvania U.S. Attorney as White-Collar Co-Chair
3 minute read
Judge Tanks Prevailing Pittsburgh Attorneys' $2.45M Fee Request to $250K
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Midlevel Appellate Court Reinstates New York's Voting Rights Act
- 2Consumer Protection Suit Cleared to Go Forward Against Irritating Eye Serum
- 3COVID-19 Was Still Relevant in Securities Class Actions During 2024, Report Says
- 4After Botched Landing of United Airlines Boeing 767, Unlikely Plaintiff Sues Carrier
- 5DOT Moves to Roll Back Emissions Rules, Eliminate DEI Programs
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
