Adolfo Lopez v. State of Indiana
2013 Ind. App. LEXIS 160
Ind. Ct. App.2013Background
- Lopez and 108 others were charged with multiple nonviolent offenses related to Acapulco Mexican restaurants; Lopez faced six class C felonies and four class D felonies.
- The trial court initially set bond at $3,000,000 surety plus $250,000 cash.
- Following an investigation, law enforcement seized more than $3,000,000 from Lopez's safety deposit boxes.
- Lopez filed a motion to reduce bond on October 31, 2012, arguing the bond was excessively high and unlawful under Indiana Code § 35-33-8-4(b).
- The trial court denied the motion on November 21, 2012, and Lopez appealed, challenging the denial as an abuse of discretion.
- The appellate court reversed and remanded, concluding the bond was excessive and directing the trial court to set a reasonable bond consistent with statutory factors.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the bond was set in excess of reasonable level | Lopez argues bond is excessive given seized assets and low risk of nonappearance | State contends bond reflects flight risk and offense severity | Yes; bond was excessive and abusable discretion |
| Whether the trial court properly weighed statutory factors in setting bond reduction | Lopez emphasizes factors favoring reduction (residence, employment, ties, citizenship, lack of prior appearances) | State notes countervailing factors (character, offense gravity, lack of funds) | No; court failed to adequately weigh factor 8 (source of funds) and overall balance favored reduction |
Key Cases Cited
- Sneed v. State, 946 N.E.2d 1255 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (abuse of discretion standard for bail reduction; factors mirror initial setting)
- Hobbs v. Lindsey, 240 Ind. 74, 162 N.E.2d 85 (1959) (excessive bail prohibition guidance)
- Reeves v. State, 923 N.E.2d 418 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (bail should be set by trial court, not on appeal)
- Mott v. State, 490 N.E.2d 1125 (Ind. Ct. App. 1986) (high bail may be improper when assets impede nonappearance risk)
- Samm v. State, 893 N.E.2d 761 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (constitutional right to bail; goal to assure appearance)
- Winn v. State, 973 N.E.2d 653 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (guides assessment of bail reduction abuse of discretion)