State Supreme Court: $20M bond for murder suspect reasonable
The state Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that a lower-court judge could have considered a bail-modification procedure for the Massachusetts man awaiting trial for the February 2021 murder of Kevin Jiang, a Yale graduate student, in the East Rock neighborhood of New Haven.
Qinxuan Pan, who this month was found competent to stand trial, is being held on $20 million bond, which was upheld in the mid-afternoon decision from the high court. Pan fled the state after the alleged shooting death, and was the focus of a nationwide man hunt that finally tracked him down in Alabama three months after Jiang’s death.
But the overall ruling is aimed at changing the landscape of criminal bond hearings going forward.
At the time of Pan’s arrest, a state prosecutor asked that the original $5 million bond included in the warrant for Pan’s arrest be raised to $50 million, charging that he was an obvious flight risk with monetary resources.
At the time of Pan’s arrest, a state prosecutor asked that the original $5 million bond included in the warrant for Pan’s arrest be raised to $50 million, charging that he was an obvious flight risk with monetary resources. Pan had been found in Montgomery, Alabama, where he rented an apartment under a false name and had $19,000 in cash, along with seven cellphones, a computer and his father’s Chinese passport.
The Supreme Court said that while the $20 million bond was not an abuse of the trial court’s discretion “given the extraordinary flight risk and public safety considerations presented in this case,” they ordered the issue back to the Superior Court level for a judge to consider a hearing that could lead to a 10-percent cash option for Pan.
The high court also wants new procedures for future bond modifications under the rights of the Connecticut Constitution.
“Because this case highlights the existence of several substantive and procedural issues concerning the information on which the judges of the Superior Court rely in setting reasonable bond amounts, we also address the procedures applicable to any future bond modification proceedings,” the midafternoon decision said. While Superior Court Judge Gerald L. Harmon had considered the issue of a high bail in a previous hearing, the high court said Harmon should have also reviewed the option of a 10-percent cash alternative.
“We conclude that Judge Harmon did not abuse his discretion in maintaining the defendant’s bond at the $20 million,” the Supreme Court wrote, but Harmon “incorrectly determined that he lacked discretion” to consider Pan’s request for a 10-percent cash bail option of $2 million.
“This particular defendant presents a uniquely significant flight risk, which is compounded by the violence of the crime with which he was charged and the lengths to which he went to avoid detection and apprehension,” the court ruled. “Put differently, this case is a paradigmatic example ofone in which a bond amount that is so high that it might well be beyond the ability of the defendant to afford is nevertheless reasonable, even if the high amount effectively serves as the denial of bond.”
The Supreme Court stressed that it does not believe that the current procedures for determining criminal bonds need changing.
“We are mindful, however, that pretrial detention may carry very serious consequences in addition to, and as a result of, the defendant’s loss of liberty,” the court wrote. “Pretrial detention can affect employment situations, housing arrangements and family relationships, and also increases the likelihood of a criminal conviction, either by interfering with the defendant’s ability to assist in his own defense or by increasing the possibility of a guilty plea.”
The high court said it is “critical that a defendant have a meaningful opportunity to seek review of his initial bond through a more extensive hearing process than was initially held at arraignment.” They wrote that if defense lawyers believe a modification is warranted, defendants may file motions for bond modification. Prosecutors, going forward, should present evidence to demonstrate that a bond is reasonable.
Pan’s next court appearance is scheduled for Dec. 5.