After a verdict, can the judge jail me right away?
Q I read about the verdict in the Rebecca Grossman trial. She was accused of recklessly driving, which resulted in the death of two young boys. The judge put her in jail immediately after the guilty verdict. How is that done before sentencing, particularly since she is going to appeal?
— H.P., Woodland Hills
A If sentencing is not done immediately after a guilty verdict in a criminal case, the judge may: (a) keep the defendant in custody, if already confined; (b) order the defendant into custody “forthwith,” which means right then and there; or (c) require the defendant to post or remain on bail to assure his or her appearance at the time of sentencing. In particularly serious cases, such as when a person is charged with murder, there is no presumption in favor of bail. The court must be satisfied that there is not a significant risk the accused is going to flee and/or cause harm to anyone else before bail is granted or continued as a condition of not being jailed.
In the matter you reference (involving Grossman), sentencing is set for April 10. Prior to the guilty verdict, she had been free on $2 million bail. After the verdict, the court remanded her into custody, commenting on the very serious nature of the offenses for which she was found guilty (which includes second-degree murder, and the death, as noted, of two young kids). It is within the judge's discretion to revoke bail. The district attorney also argued earlier that Grossman violated a protective order in the case, which precluded disclosure of evidence under seal, and asked that her bail be revoked. I do not know if that played any role in the judge's thinking. As things stand, Grossman's counsel may make additional arguments to try to get her out of jail on bail during the appeal.
Q How does a sentencing hearing work in a criminal case?
— A.D., Norwalk
A Before a judge imposes a sentence, both sides (prosecution and defense) are entitled to an opportunity to be heard as to the appropriate penalty. The rules of evidence are more relaxed than during trial. Also, there are certain time frames by which sentencing typically must be handled.
The defendant's rights with respect to sentencing include: (a) to be present, (b) to be represented by counsel, (c) to present evidence on his or her behalf, (d) to propose an alternative sentence (different from what the prosecution seeks), and (e) to be arraigned for judgment, which is different from earlier arraignment when the defendant is first advised of the charges. In this latter instance, the defendant is to be advised of the nature of the criminal charges, the plea(s) and the verdicts entered.
Sentencing brings various considerations into play as well. If a defendant is convicted of two or more crimes, for example, the judge will decide whether the sentence runs concurrently or consecutively. (In other words, if a defendant is sentenced to one year concurrently with a two-year sentence, he or she will serve two years; if a defendant's sentence is consecutive, that would be back-to-back, so three years.)
California Victim Compensation Board
You can read about this board and money that may be available to a crime victim here in California at: victims.ca.gov.
Ron Sokol has been a practicing attorney for over 40 years, and has also served many times as a judge pro tem, mediator, and arbitrator. It is important to keep in mind that this column presents a summary of the law, and is not to be treated or considered legal advice, let alone a substitute for actual consultation with a qualified professional.