Sneed v. State
946 N.E.2d 1255
Ind. Ct. App.2011Background
- Sneed was charged with two Class A felonies for dealing methamphetamine in two causes and bail was set at $12,500 cash in each, total $25,000.
- Sneed moved to reduce bail, arguing she has no income, is disabled, and lacks funds to post cash; the trial court held a hearing.
- Sneed testified about residence, family ties in Indiana, caregiving, unemployment due to disability, and prior nonviolent history with probation completed.
- The State argued the gravity of the charges and potential penalties supported a higher bail; no opposing evidence was presented.
- The trial court denied the motion to reduce bail without articulating reasons; the court did not alter the initial cash-only requirement.
- On appeal, Sneed challenges both the bail amount and the cash-only posting requirement, seeking a ten-percent cash bond or surety bond.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court abused discretion denying bail reduction | Sneed argues factors favor reduction given ties and disability | Sneed’s risk factors and charges justify no reduction | No abuse; reduction denial affirmed |
| Whether bail amount is excessive under statute and case law | Bail is set low; gravity of charges should not require higher bail | Total bail appropriate given potential penalties and flight risk | Not excessive |
| Whether cash-only bail violated discretion or statute | Should have option of surety bond due to financial inability to post cash | Cash-only is permissible; 10% or real estate bonds possible but not required | Trial court abused discretion by denying surety bond option; remand to allow surety bond |
Key Cases Cited
- Hobbs v. Lindsey, 240 Ind. 74 (1959) (bail must be reasonably related to ensuring appearance)
- Samm v. State, 893 N.E.2d 761 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (remand when trial court silent on factors; excessive-bail review)
- Reeves v. State, 923 N.E.2d 418 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (need for articulated rationale when bail amount appears excessive)
- Mott v. State, 490 N.E.2d 1125 (Ind. Ct. App. 1986) (surety bond vs. cash bond; statutory discretion in execution of bail)
- Wertz v. State, 771 N.E.2d 677 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002) (bail amount review for abuse of discretion)
- Custard v. State, 629 N.E.2d 1289 (Ind. Ct. App. 1994) (consideration of bail execution methods under statute)
- Perry v. State, 541 N.E.2d 913 (Ind. 1989) (abuse of discretion standard for bail decisions)
- Donaldson v. State, 904 N.E.2d 294 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (presumption that trial court follows applicable law; need for factual basis)