Chief Judge Sayfie is Pushing Bail Reform – Violent Criminals Should Not Get a Pass in the Process

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
2023 Buick Encore GX Essence is impressive SUV
Grant Miller

Nushin G. Sayfie is the Chief Judge of the 11th Judicial Circuit of Florida, one of the top five largest jurisdictions in the country. To achieve a role of such prominence is a very big deal in the world of judicial appointments.

She has, by all measures, led a very prestigious career — having presided over hundreds of felony cases in her time as a circuit court judge and earlier in her career as a lawyer with the Miami-Dade Public Defender’s Office. Certainly, Judge Sayfie’s experience and credentials are clear.

So, why are we stunned at her current role leading the charge on a proposed reform plan that would modify Miami-Dade County’s Pretrial Release Program to the extent that violent criminals might be released without posting a bond and before appearing in front of a judge.

We can’t help but feel something is wrong here. Can one sole individual do this? Shouldn’t something of this significance be driven by the county, the state, the governor — or by the constitution? According to the Florida Constitution, Article 1, Section 14, it sounds like Judge Sayfie is in violation of the constitution, which she was sworn to uphold.

At minimum it should be a judge deciding at the initial appearance of the defendant. Nothing less. Eliminating the initial appearance will induce criminal defendants to believe even more that the criminal justice system is not effective and will not be imposed against them.

Apparently, we’re not alone in feeling this way. Though we understand that the State Attorney’s Office and the Miami-Dade Public Defender’s Office are providing insight and input into the process, along with widely varying degrees of support, we needed to take a closer look for ourselves.

It turns out State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle also is concerned something is amiss. In order to see some of the communications between her office and Judge Sayfie, Miami’s Community Newspapers performed a public request of some of the emails swirling between these offices. Click here to see some of the communications between their offices.

For nearly three decades, Katherine Fernandez Rundle has served Miami-Dade County as State Attorney. She has always worked hard to ensure public safety while respecting the rights and dignity of those accused of committing crimes. Her leadership on prosecutorial innovations have transformed the administration of justice in Miami for the better.

Among the recommended changes under the proposed reform program is something called a “delegated release” whereby Miami-Dade Corrections and Rehabilitation Officers may release individuals charged with low-level, non-violent crimes without a monetary bond and prior to a first appearance before a judge unless the accused has a history of missed court appearances or a significant prior criminal record.

OK, so this kind of reform makes sense.

And anyone charged with any one of the more than 700 non-bondable and/or violent crimes would be excluded from delegated release, as they should be. Their crimes are on the “excludable list” and persons charged with such crimes would not be released prior to a first appearance.

But as always, the devil is in the details and here is the question: Is the “excludable list” complete? Right now, it appears as though the courts don’t find crimes such as robbery by sudden snatching, animal cruelty resulting in serious bodily injury or death, and non-domestic assault and battery as serious enough to warrant that those accused of them be excluded from delegated release.

So, if the proposed reforms went into effect, a defendant charged with non-domestic assault and battery would be eligible for delegated release, without posting a bond and before appearing in front of a Judge. C’mon, man! Really? New York anyone?

State Attorney Fernandez Rundle has made her position on these issues clear: She disagrees with the court’s proposed plan that would allow these defendants to be released without first appearing before a judge. She also believes that any bail reform initiative should involve input from the community at large and that the process of development and implementation should be transparent and taken slowly.

Miami’s Community Newspapers wholeheartedly agrees with the State Attorney’s position. Violent criminals don’t deserve a pass and the last thing Miami needs is to become another San Francisco, Chicago, or New York, where crime and bail-reform buyer’s remorse are on the rise.

If you have thoughts, ideas, and comments on this matter, please send them in by email to grant@cnews.net or call at 305-323-8206.


Connect To Your Customers & Grow Your Business

Click Here

8 COMMENTS

  1. Yeah, this Judge has lost her WIG>>>> Pinera just stop with your bleeding-heart conspiracy theory crap, You’re what’s wrong with people today in society, you obviously have never been a victim of a violent crime so just do everyone a favor, STFU. Youve obviously been sheltered from the real world all your life, please, keep your comments to yourself.

  2. As a Leo with 40 years, I absolutely support the honorable judge Sayfie in stopping this insanity which is turning out violent criminals back to the street to commit further crimes. I have witnessed several arrestees back on the streets within hours of being arrested. We do not need to follow other large cities who have made this terrible decision!!! There has to be consequences for one’s actions!

  3. Time to get a new State Attorney. She’s been there too long!! This so called ” Progressive” judge needs to be sued by all the violent crime victims,to stop this lack of respect towards us regular people in Miami!! It’s bad enough that we have to deal with high crime, to have more violent criminals released to prey on society!!

  4. I would concur with Mr. Pertierra, unfortunately, this article has very little understanding of the bail reform process and has to do with fear-mongering. I would suggest you actually review the crime statistics of New York and several other cities where violent crime has actually decreased.

    Republican talking points are clearly evident in this article as they follow hand in glove with the agenda to protect the bail bondsman and for-profit prisons industry. Our justice system has proven time and time again that is skewed toward those who can afford to be set free. Moreover, violent crime should be the determining factor for bail, not just criminal activity.

    Bail reform is much-needed and long overdue. Ms. Rundell’s legacy as the top prosecutor is seen as anything but stellar.

    Next time try using less hyperbole and more analysis of the issue.

  5. Being curious about who sets a bond or bail (words seem to be interchangeable) I looked up Florida statutes:
    2018 Florida Statutes > Title XLVII > Chapter 924 > Section 15 >903.34 Who may admit to bail.—In criminal actions instituted or pending in any state court, bonds given by defendants before trial until appeal shall be approved by a committing trial court judge or the sheriff.

    This law does not state someone representing the two delegations authorized so I’m not sure how anyone else can “set the bail” or “release with no bail”

    I believe that the above law is still in place in Florida but if not I will stand corrected.

  6. Pertierra is correct. Misdemeanor battery cases carry a $1500 bond at most. It is a huge expense to the community to house and maintain folks that can’t afford a $1500 bond. Release with non-monetary conditions protects the community and reflects the spirit of the constitution.

  7. Grant’s details may be off, but his criticism remains – under the new proposals persons who allegedly committed violent acts may be released from jail without posting bond. So, what ensures their appearance in court, and the application of justice? It seems regardless of the perceived “inequities” of the cash bond system, the community has a stake in seeing that alleged violent criminals appear in court. The question I would ask is how have these “reforms” worked in other jurisdictions? Do defendants appear, or are we suddenly spending a lot more money chasing non-bail jumpers? Cheers.

  8. Not sure you understand the process . Your understanding fails in a significant fashion . All bendable offenses are bondable and therefore there is no necessity to appear in front of a judge to obtain a bond . Therefore everyone charged with a battery or any type of violent offense short of murder is entitled to a bond .None of those appear before a judge before bonding out unless the crime is a life offense or punishable by life .So your analysis misses the mark .Bail reform equalizes the playing field between the ones that can afford a bond and those that can’t afford a bond . It has nothing to do with allowing people charged with violent crimes simply getting out of Jail . Your criticism and mantle of protection for the State Attorney is misplaced and misses the mark.

Comments are closed.