Guide to Bond in Central Oklahoma

Guide to Bond in Central Oklahoma

When you or somebody you know is arrested in Oklahoma, one of the first questions that arise is often, “what about bail or bond” and “how do jails determine bond before someone is able to see a judge”? The simple answer is a bond schedule, which has an arbitrary amount of money as bond for individual offenses, i.e. bond amount for a DUI arrest, bond amount for a drug trafficking arrest, and every other offense that may bring someone into a county jail in Oklahoma. 

Who Decides the Initial Bond Amount at Arrest?

Law enforcement, such as cops and detectives, present recommended charges when the “book” someone into a jail. The jail then takes the listed charges presented by the arresting officer and sets bond based on those charges. This system gives cops an incredible amount of discretion in how high or reasonable a person’s bond may be prior to seeing a judge.

The use of bond schedules in Oklahoma has drawn much criticism as it gives wide discretion to cops making arrests to determine how hard it will be for someone to bond out of jail. In theory, if an officer doesn’t like someone they arrest, they could simply allege a large number, which would result in the bond be much much higher. Here’s an example for a DUI arrest:

• DUI – $2,500 bond
• Traffic violation – $500 bond
• Expired tag – $500 bond
• Resisting arrest – $2,500
• TOTAL: $6,000

This example does not include all the charges an officer could present against someone following a DUI arrest, but it does show how quickly bond could be increased from $2,500 to more than double, $6,000. 

There is also limited accountability for officers to present exact charges or only the charges they are confident warrant prosecution. Officers only need probable cause to arrest someone and prosecutors only need the same level of proof to file criminal charges. Therefore, many people find themselves facing excessive charges, which criminal defense attorneys must help them attack to reduce charges to only what the prosecution can potentially prove.

What protections are there from Excessive Bond?

Bottom-line up front, criminal defense attorneys are the greatest protection from excessive bond. An experienced criminal defense attorney can identify key facts in your case to present the most compelling motion to the Court to seek a bond reduction. The purpose of bail is to protect the community and ensure the defendant appears at court. 

There are a wide variety of factors the courts consider in evaluating requests to reduce bond or establish reasonable bond amounts . The most important factors courts consider in evaluating bond requests include: 

1. Ties to the Community
2. Seriousness of the Offense
3. Defendant’s Criminal History
4. Flight Risk
5. Record of Appearing for Court Appearance
6. Likelihood of Conviction
7. Potential Punishment

What Should I Do if a Loved One is in Jail?

Your loved one needs an experienced criminal defense attorney, if they are in jail. The sooner you begin working with a criminal defense attorney the better, for a number of reasons:

1. Memories fade over time: the cops have a purpose to their conversations with potential witnesses and their purpose does not align with your loved one. When you hire a criminal defense team they can interview witnesses and get the rest of the story that cops may have missed, which allows your defense team to capture testimony to support your defense. 
2. Evidence fades over time: most businesses delete video footage after seven days or possibly even less time. Other forms of evidence are not preserved by businesses, unless they receive a preservation notice. Therefore, important evidence to protect your future may be lost, unless your defense team obtains or preserves evidence for your defense.
3. Jail Calls are recorded and listed to by Prosecutors: Telmate or GTL records every call made in or out of the jail in Oklahoma. Additionally, prosecutors and investigators are able to do searches for specific terms or words of these calls, which allows them to listen to only the most damaging calls made by our clients. Every call is recorded and saved for at least the duration of the case. Prosecutors use these calls and any damaging information to hurt your defense. I’ve seen countless cases that were winnable at trial, but my client was forced to enter a plea based on a recorded jail call days after their arrest.  

If you or a loved one has been arrested, do not hesitate to reach out to our team at Cannon & Associates. Although we provide many great resources, we also offer FREE Case Strategy Sessions (no cost to you) where we can provide you with detailed insights and guidance on your case specifically. 

In the meantime, let’s take a closer look at what the Oklahoma bond schedule is, why it matters, and how it works.

BAIL VS. BOND: UNDERSTANDING THE DIFFERENCE

As we mentioned above, when someone is arrested, they may be given the option to be released from jail while they await their court date. However, the process can be confusing, especially when it comes to the terms bail and bond.

• Bail refers to the amount of money set by the court to guarantee that the defendant will appear in court for their hearings. If the defendant shows up as required, the bail is typically returned, minus any administrative fees. If the defendant fails to appear, the bail is forfeited. In Oklahoma, for example, many counties follow a standardized bond schedule, but the judge may set a different bail amount depending on the charges.
  
• Bond, on the other hand, is the financial pledge or promise made to ensure the defendant’s court appearance. Often, individuals cannot afford the full bail amount, which is where a bondsman comes in. A bondsman will pay the bail on the defendant’s behalf, usually for a fee (typically around 10% to 15% of the total bail amount). In exchange, the bondsman may set certain conditions, like regular check-ins or restrictions on the defendant’s whereabouts. If the defendant fails to meet these conditions, or is re-arrested, the bond may be revoked, sending the defendant back to jail.

How Can I Get Someone Out of Jail?

If you’re arrested in Oklahoma, most counties use a standard bond schedule, though judges may sometimes adjust the bail amount depending on the details of the case. Bail is essentially money paid to secure your release from jail until your case is resolved, also known as posting bond. In order to get someone out of jail there are multiple options. 

You can post the full cash bond with the Court Clerk, go directly to the detention center/jail and find the bond desk and post the bond, or work with a bondsman to post the bond.

PURPOSE OF BAIL

The main purpose of bail is to ensure that the defendant returns for all required court appearances. After the case is finished, the bail is refunded, if a cash bond is paid. Alternatively, you will only have to pay 10-percent to 15-percent of the bond, if you work with a bondsman, but you will not receive a refund of that amount at the end of the case. 

What Can I Do if I Can’t Afford the Full Bond Amount?

If you can’t afford the full bail, a bail bondsman can step in to help. In exchange for a fee, typically between 10-15% of the total bail, the bondsman will post the bail for you. They may also impose certain conditions, such as:

• Checking in regularly, often weekly or at other agreed intervals
• Staying away from certain people or places
• Not leaving the jurisdiction without permission

If you violate any of these conditions or are arrested again while out on bail, the bondsman can revoke the bond, which could result in you being sent back to jail until the case is resolved or a new bond is posted.

What Types of Bail Exist in Oklahoma? How is Bond Posted in Oklahoma?

Not all bail is created equal. The amount and type of bail set, as well as your options for posting it, depend on various factors, such as the severity of the charges and the defendant’s criminal history. One challenge with Oklahoma’s bail system is the variation in bond amounts across the state. For example, one county may set a bond for a certain offense at $4,000, while a smaller, rural county could set the same offense’s bond at $20,000.

In Oklahoma, common types of bail include:
1. SURETY BOND
A surety bond is posted by a third party, usually a bail bond company. The company will pay the full bail amount to the court for a 10% to 15% fee. However, it’s important to note that surety bonds are non-refundable; the fee paid to the bondsman is kept as compensation for their service.

2. CASH BOND
A cash bond is a straightforward option where the defendant pays the full bail amount in cash to the court. If the defendant attends all required court dates, the bail is refunded at the end of the case, minus any administrative fees.

3. PROPERTY BOND
Oklahoma allows defendants to use property as collateral to post bail. A property bond means that the defendant or their family can pledge real property (usually a home) to cover the full bail amount. If the defendant fails to appear in court, the court can take possession of the property.

4. PERSONAL RECOGNIZANCE BOND
For minor offenses (typically non-violent misdemeanor crimes), the defendant may be released on a personal recognizance bond (PR bond). This type of bail only requires the defendant to sign an agreement promising to return to court. The court may set the bail amount at $0 for PR bonds, but it’s not always guaranteed.

WHAT YOU NEED TO DO TO POST BAIL IN OKLAHOMA?

After an arrest, an initial bail hearing is typically held within 48 hours. In some cases, a predetermined bail amount may be set at the time of arrest. During the hearing, a judge will decide on the bail amount based on the severity of the offense and local procedures. The judge will also inform you where the bail can be posted.

By understanding the different types of bail in Oklahoma and the steps to post it, you can navigate the process more smoothly. If you’re facing criminal charges, it’s always a good idea to consult with an attorney to ensure you’re fully informed about your options.

BOND POSTING FOR PERSONS IN CUSTODY ON OKLAHOMA CITY MUNICIPAL COURT CHARGE(S)

If you’re in custody in Oklahoma City and facing charges, it’s important to know where and how to post a bond. Bond posting can only be done at the Oklahoma County Detention Center, located at 701 Couch Drive, Oklahoma City, OK 73102, during the following hours: Monday through Friday, 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.

You may use the following link to search for a loved one’s custody status or warrant in Oklahoma City, click here.

You can search the Oklahoma County Detention Center for inmate information and bonds at the following link: click here.

ONLINE BOND PAYMENTS

If you are eligible to pay online, your bond payment will be processed, and the release will occur on the next business day. However, if you pay in person at the Customer Service Window during business hours (Monday through Friday, 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., excluding City-observed holidays), the release will be processed immediately.

GOT QUESTIONS ABOUT BOND SCHEDULES OR LEGAL MATTERS?

As you can see, being charged with a criminal offense involves numerous factors that we know that understanding how bond schedules work and how they can affect your case can be overwhelming. Whether you’re uncertain about the bond amount set in your case, facing potential bond violations, or simply need clarity on how bond schedules differ across counties, we’re here to provide the support and guidance you need. Our team is ready to provide the answers and make the process more understandable, helping you navigate the legal system with confidence, and ensuring that you understand the potential consequences of bond decisions.

Call us today at 405-591-3935 for a FREE case strategy session and answers to your questions about bond or a loved one’s custody status. You may also fill out the form on our website to get the information you need. We’ll make sure you fully understand your bond options, your rights, and the best steps to take in moving forward.

Don’t forget to check out our other FREE Resources on the website and the helpful content on our YouTube channel, @Legal_Cannon, so you can stay in the loop on important legal matters.

OKLAHOMA BOND ANALYSIS BY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

The following case, Brill v. Gurich, is used by judges and criminal defense attorneys across Oklahoma every day in consideration of bond reductions and establishing reasonable bond. The factors stated by the Court are in bold and discussed above in this article.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Brill v. Gurich, 1998 OK CR 49

965 P.2d 404

DECIDED: September 3, 1998

Brill v. Gurich
1998 OK CR 49
965 P.2d 404
Decided: 09/03/1998
Modified: 09/23/1998
BRUCE BRILL, Petitioner -vs- THE HONORABLE NOMA GURICH, Respondent
Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals

Cite as: 1998 OK CR 49, 965 P.2d 404

ORDER REMANDING FOR ADDITIONAL FINDINGS OF FACT

[965 P.2d 405]

¶1 On August 14, 1998, Petitioner filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus in this Court after being denied bond pending trial in the District Court of Oklahoma County. In an order filed August 14, 1998, the Honorable Noma D. Gurich, District Judge, denied Petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus. Judge Gurich denied bond finding that Petitioner is a flight risk and that he poses a threat to the community.

¶2 Twice we have found it necessary to direct a response from the attorneys in this matter to clarify the record.1 For reasons set out below, we now find it is necessary to remand this matter to the District Court for additional findings of fact and conclusions of law.

¶3 We first want to reiterate that our constitutional provisions guarantee the right to bail to an accused in a criminal case subject to limited exceptions. This guarantee is based upon the legal principle that a person accused of a crime is presumed to be innocent of the charged offenses and shall be admitted to bail until his or her guilt has been determined. See Petition of Humphrey, 1979 OK CR 97, 601 P.2d 103, 106. Unless this right to bail before trial is preserved, the presumption of innocence will lose its meaning. See Stack v. Boyle, 342 U.S. 1, 4, 72 S.Ct. 1, 3, 96 L.Ed. 3 (1951).

¶4 The right to freedom before conviction permits the unhampered preparation of a defense and serves to prevent the infliction of punishment prior to conviction. [965 P.2d 406] Id. The judges of this State have a duty and responsibility to apply the law and, further, in these matters they must ensure bail is not used as a tool of punishment. Because of the constitutional mandate, bail must be set in a reasonable amount to ensure the presence of an accused at future proceedings, and the denial of bail is allowed under very limited circumstances.

¶5 Presently, the judges of this State are required to consider the guidelines set forth in 1979 in Petition of Humphrey, when setting the amount of bail. These guidelines include:

1. The seriousness of the crime charged against the defendant, the apparent likelihood of conviction and the extent of the punishment prescribed by the Legislature;
2. The defendant’s criminal record, if any, and previous record on bail if any;
3. His reputation, and mental condition;
4. The length of his residence in the community;
5. His family ties and relationships;
6. His employment status, record of employment and his financial condition;
7. The identity of responsible members of the community who would vouch for defendant’s reliability;
8. Any other factors indicating defendant’s mode of life, or ties to the community or bearing on the risk of failure to appear.

(Emphasis added on www.jpcannonlawfirm.com)(citations omitted). Id., 601 P.2d at 108.

¶6 Subsequent to Humphrey, the Federal government implemented The Bail Reform Act of 1984 (Act)2 which “allows a federal court to detain an arrestee pending trial if the Government demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence after an adversary hearing that no release conditions ‘will reasonably assure … the safety of any other person and the community.’” United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 , 741, 107 S.Ct. 2095, 2098, 95 L.Ed.2d 697 (1987). The U.S. Supreme Court in Salerno addressed this Act, in light of an allegation that it violated due process, and concluded that the pretrial detention contemplated by the Bail Reform Act “fully comports with constitutional requirements.” Id. The U. S. Supreme Court specifically concluded that the Act “does not constitute punishment before trial in violation of the Due Process Clause.” Id., 107 S.Ct. at 2102.

¶7 The citizens of Oklahoma subsequently passed an amendment to Article 2, Section 8, of the Oklahoma Constitution, effective July 1, 1989, which now provides:

All persons shall be bailable by sufficient sureties, except that bail may be denied for:

1. capital offenses when the proof of guilt is evident, or the presumption thereof is great;
2. violent offenses;
3. offenses where the maximum sentence may be life imprisonment or life imprisonment without parole;
4. felony offenses where the person charged with the offense has been convicted of two or more felony offenses arising out of different transactions; and
5. controlled dangerous substances offenses where the maximum sentence may be at least ten (10) years imprisonment.

On all offenses specified in paragraphs 2 through 5 of this section, the proof of guilt must be evident, or the presumption must be great, and it must be on the grounds that no condition of release would assure the safety of the community or any person.

¶8 We find it necessary, therefore, to revisit Humphrey to ensure proper due process requirements are met and that our state constitutional requirements do not and will not conflict with federal constitutional requirements.

I.

¶9 Under federal law, Section 3141(a) of the Act requires a judicial officer to determine whether an arrestee on a federal offense shall be detained. Section 3142(e) provides that “[i]f, after a hearing pursuant to the provisions of subsection (f) of this section, [965 P.2d 407] the judicial officer finds that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the person as required and the safety of any other person and the community, such judicial officer shall order the detention of the person before trial.” Procedural safeguards are provided the arrestee in Section 3142(f). The arrestee may request the presence of counsel at the detention hearing, may testify and present witnesses, as well as proffer evidence, and may cross-examine other witnesses appearing at the hearing. “If the judicial officer finds that no conditions of pretrial release can reasonably assure the safety of other persons and the community, he must state his findings of fact in writing, § 3142(i), and support his conclusion with ‘clear and convincing evidence,’ § 3142(f).” Salerno, 107 S.Ct. at 2099.

¶10 Congress specified considerations relevant to that decision in Section 3142(g):

1. The nature and circumstances of the offense charged, including whether the offense is a crime of violence or involves a narcotic drug;
2. the weight of the evidence against the person;
3. the history and characteristics of the person, including —
4. the person’s character, physical and mental condition, family ties, employment, financial resources, length of residence in the community, community ties, past conduct, history relating to drug or alcohol abuse, criminal history, and record concerning appearance at court proceedings; and
5. whether, at the time of the current offense or arrest, the person was on probation, on parole, or on other release pending trial, sentencing, appeal, or completion of sentence for an offense under Federal, State, or local law; and
6. the nature and seriousness of the danger to any person or the community that would be posed by the person’s release.

These factors are comparable to the ones this Court set out in Humphrey.

II.

¶11 Following the enactment of the Bail Reform Act, the bail provisions of the Oklahoma Constitution were amended in 1988. Prior to the amendment, the Oklahoma Constitution made all offenses, with the qualified exception of capital crimes, bailable. Article 2, Section 8, as amended, directs that in addition to capital offenses, bail may be denied for violent offenses, offenses where the maximum sentence may be life imprisonment or life imprisonment without parole, felony offenses where the person charged with the offense has been convicted of two or more felony offenses arising out of different transactions; and controlled dangerous substances offenses where the maximum sentence may be at least ten (10) years imprisonment. However, as to the non-capital offenses, bail can be denied ONLY when the proof of guilt is evident, or the presumption great, and it must be on the grounds that no condition of release would assure the safety of the community or any person.

III.

¶12 A review of the federal constitutional analysis set out in Salerno reveals we must ensure the application of our state constitutional provisions relating to bail does not violate federal constitutional rights. In doing so, we must at the same time ensure the independent provisions of our state constitution are enforced.

¶13 In addition to the guidelines set out in Humphrey, in cases that fall under Article 2, Section 8, of the Oklahoma Constitution, we now find that the following procedural requirements must henceforth be met before any order denying bond is entered:

1. A hearing shall be held immediately upon the person’s first appearance before the judicial officer unless that person, or the attorney for the State, seeks a continuance. Except for good cause, a continuance on motion of the person may not exceed five days (not including any intermediate Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday), and a continuance on motion of the attorney for the State may not exceed [965 P.2d 408] three days (not including any intermediate Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday).
2. At the hearing, such person shall have the right to be represented by counsel, and, if financially unable to obtain adequate representation, to have counsel appointed.
3. The person shall be afforded an opportunity to testify, to present witnesses, to cross-examine witnesses who appear at the hearing, and to present information by proffer or otherwise.
4. The rules concerning admissibility of evidence in criminal trials shall not apply.
5. The burden of proof as to the provisions of Article 2, Section 8, is that of clear and convincing evidence. As to paragraph 1, capital offenses, the court must determine by clear and convincing evidence if “the proof of guilt is evident, or the presumption thereof is great.” As to paragraphs 2 through 5, in addition to the court’s determination that the proof of guilt is evident, or the presumption thereof is great, the facts the judge uses to support a finding that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the safety of any other person and the community shall be supported by clear and convincing evidence.
6. The hearing may be reopened, before or after a determination by the judicial officer, at any time before trial if the judicial officer finds that information exists that was not known to the movant at the time of the hearing and that has a material bearing on the issue whether there are conditions of release that will reasonably assure the appearance of the person as required and the safety of any other person and the community.

¶14 If bail is denied, the order of the District Court shall include written findings of fact and a statement of the reasons for the detention, supporting the conclusion with clear and convincing evidence that no conditions of release can reasonably assure the safety of the community or any person, and that proof of guilt is evident or the presumption great.

¶15 Further, if the judicial officer determines that bail is appropriate as to a crime coming within the provisions of paragraphs 2 through 5 of Article 2, Section 8, but that conditions of release are necessary to assure the safety of the community or any person, the judicial officer shall order the pretrial release of the person:

1. subject to the condition that the person not commit a Federal, State, or local crime during the period of release; and
2. subject to the least restrictive further condition, or combination of conditions, that such judicial officer determines will reasonably assure the appearance of the person as required and the safety of any other person and the community, which may include that the person:
3. remain in the custody of a designated person, who agrees to assume supervision and to report any violation of a release condition to the court, if the designated person is able reasonably to assure the judicial officer that the person will appear as required and will not pose a danger to the safety of any other person or the community;
4. abide by specified restrictions on personal associations, place of abode, or travel;
5. avoid all contact with an alleged victim of the crime and with a potential witness who may testify concerning the offense;
6. report on a regular basis as directed;
7. comply with a specified curfew;
8. refrain from possessing a firearm, destructive device, or other dangerous weapon;
9. refrain from excessive use of alcohol, or any use of a narcotic drug or other controlled substance without a prescription by a licensed medical practitioner;

[965 P.2d 409] h. satisfy any other condition that is reasonably necessary to assure the appearance of the person as required and to assure the safety of any other person and the community; and

1. execute a bail bond.

¶16 The judicial officer may at any time, after notice and hearing, amend the order to impose additional or different conditions of release. If habeas relief is sought in this Court as to denial of bail, the amount of bail, or the conditions of release on bail, we will review only for an abuse of discretion.

¶17 Therefore, pursuant to the foregoing, the order of the District Court does not meet the above requirements as it merely denies Petitioner bail finding only that Petitioner “is a flight risk” and “poses a threat to the community” without any substantiating facts. In addition, the order does not make any findings to establish that there are not any conditions of release that would assure the safety of the community. Therefore, the matter is REMANDED to the District Court of Oklahoma County and the District Court is directed to make additional findings of fact utilizing the guidelines set out in Humphrey, as amended herein. The District Court shall also set forth findings of fact to include the reasons for denying bail and to support its conclusion with clear and convincing evidence that no conditions of release can reasonably assure the safety of the community or any person. Additional findings and conclusions of the District Court shall be filed in this Court on or before fifteen (15) days from the date of this Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.