A criminal defendant with a long list of prior offenses and a history of violent behavior recently won a round in court over his bail amount. But the V.I. Supreme Court delivered a split decision in the case, saying they could not act on a demand by the accused to be moved from the jail where he is being held.
Chief Supreme Court Justice Rhys Hodge issued the mid-December opinion in the case of Jimmy Davis vs. People of the Virgin Islands. Hodge declared that the lower court set bail based on statements made about Davis’ behavior without giving the defendant a chance to present his side of the story.
In the ruling on Dec. 19, the chief justice said, “Violent threats and harassment directed towards lawyers, judges, and their staff, and families are directly relevant not just to whether a defendant is a danger to the community, but also whether the defendant will comply with all court orders directed towards him … ”
But at the same time, Hodge said, courts must make decisions based on arguments made and evidence presented. Making bail decisions based on prior bad acts without giving Davis or the government a chance to prove the allegations or argue against them violates “bedrock principles of our judicial system,” the chief justice said.
Davis is currently facing charges connected to the rape of a minor on St. Croix in April 2020. At the initial hearing following his arrest, bail was set at $1 million. Davis promptly filed a complaint, calling the bail excessive.
In a second motion, the defendant further alleged he was moved from a St. Croix jail to St. Thomas because he stood up for his rights. Lawyers for the Justice Department opposed the motions, pointing to Davis’ 38 prior arrests, several convictions, and some aggressive police encounters, which, in one instance, led to several high-speed car chases.
The government told the court the defendant was both a danger to the community and a flight risk. The judge in the case turned the two motions down.
After the court rejected the new challenge, Davis took his complaint to the high court. In April, the lower court was ordered to revisit the case. Hodge, along with Associate Justice Ive Arlington Swan and Designated Justice Renee Gumbs-Carty, heard oral arguments in the case in May.
The Superior Court had, in general, been working to modify its pre-trial practices to set bail in an amount that’s not seen as punitive. Davis’ bail was reduced from $1 million to $250,000 in a subsequent hearing. But after the bail modification, Davis asked the court to release him on his own recognizance and grant him an affordable bail. The judge said doing so may not guarantee his appearances at future pre-trial hearings.
By then, signs of old behaviors were surfacing. Six defense attorneys representing Davis had come and gone, each one asking the court’s permission to withdraw. Hodge said the trial court based its bail determination on one instance where a Davis lawyer asked to be taken off the case.
New hearings have again been ordered with specific directions that the defendant be confronted with complaints about his actions on the record at a hearing.
But Hodge said the court had no jurisdiction to rule on the jail transfer because that action was not related to the bail set in the 2020 rape case.
