How has the Dominguez case affected pre-trial release conditions in the 8th Judicial Circuit?
BY JENNIFER CABRERA
GAINESVILLE, Fla. – The Daniel Dominguez case has led to noticeable changes in pre-trial release conditions in the 8th Judicial Circuit, with bail amounts generally lower but more defendants being held without bail pending trial.
Appeals court: defendants are “entitled to be released on bail in a reasonable amount”
State Attorney Brian Kramer told Alachua Chronicle that the process for setting monetary bail in the 8th Judicial Circuit has changed because of a recent appeals court decision holding that defendants are “entitled to be released on bail in a reasonable amount” and that the amount should not “preclude the probability of an ordinary citizen” being able to post bail.
The change began with the case of Daniel Dominguez, who was just sentenced to three years in state prison for threatening to shoot up a middle school. Dominguez was arrested in October 2023 after posting an Instagram video in which he said he wanted to shoot up a middle school on a weekend so police would kill him, and Judge Thomas Jaworski set bail at $1 million on each of the two original counts – terrorism and making a threat to commit an act of terrorism.
At his First Appearance hearing, Dominguez’ attorney said his family could only come up with $25,000, so he could only post bail if it were set at $250,000 or lower. The defense attorney argued that it was unlawful for Dominguez to be held on an unaffordable bond unless the prosecution filed a motion for pre-trial detention without bail. The prosecuting attorney responded that courts have held that a bond is not “per se, excessive” just because a defendant testifies that he can’t meet it. Judge Thomas Jaworski set bail at $2 million ($1 million on each of the two original counts – terrorism and making a threat to commit an act of terrorism) and added a condition that Dominguez not return to any public or private schools.
At a hearing on a motion to reduce the bond in November, Judge David Kreider said the court was “very concerned for danger to the community” but agreed to reduce the bond to $1,500,000.
Dominguez’ appeal
Dominguez appealed the bond amount to the First District Court of Appeals (1st DCA), which ruled on January 31 that he was being illegally detained and would need to be released on February 5 “unless the trial court enters an order setting reasonable conditions of pre-trial release or conducts further proceedings and enters an order under section 907.041(5)(c) of the Florida Statutes.”
That statute holds that there is a “presumption in favor of release on nonmonetary conditions for any person who is granted pre-trial release unless such person is charged with a dangerous crime.” If the defendant is charged with a dangerous crime, the defendant “shall be released on monetary conditions” (i.e., a financial bond) if the monetary conditions are necessary to protect the community or assure the presence of the person at hearings or at trial. The crime of making a written threat to kill is on the list of dangerous crimes in the statute.
Section (5)(c) of the statute states that the State Attorney may make a motion for pre-trial detention under certain conditions, including a finding that the defendant “poses the threat of harm to the community” or “that there are no conditions of release reasonably sufficient to protect the community from the risk of physical harm to persons.”
Noting that prosecutors had not made a motion to hold Dominguez without bail pending trial, 1st DCA Judge Stephanie Ray wrote in a concurrence, “The Florida Constitution guarantees that a presumptively innocent individual will be released prior to trial on reasonable conditions… [T]he only exception to the guarantee is if a court finds that no conditions of pre-trial release can reasonably protect the community, ensure the presence of the accused, or ensure the integrity of the judicial process… That has not occurred.”
Judge: “The court has converted a condition of release into a jail term”
Ray also wrote that because Dominguez and his family testified that they could only come up with “$25,000 or a $250,000 bond… the court has converted a condition of release into a jail term… [W]hile the court has wide discretion in fashioning appropriate conditions of release – after it makes the threshold determination to release the accused – it must stop short of imposing a requirement that simply cannot be met… For these reasons, the petitioner is being illegally detained.”
Judge grants motion for pre-trial detention of Dominguez
The State Attorney’s office quickly followed up with a motion for pre-trial detention, and on February 5, Judge David Kreider ordered that Dominguez be held without bail, concluding that, “[T]here are no conditions of release reasonable sufficient to protect the community.”
About 100 motions for pre-trial detention without bail since early February
Since that decision from 1st DCA, there have been frequent motions for pre-trial detention without bail, and judges in the 8th Judicial Circuit have more often set bail amounts that are “reasonable” for crimes that are not on the list of “dangerous” crimes that qualify for pre-trial detention. The result is that more defendants are being held without bail, and few are being held on very high bail; looking back 30 days ago, for example, the defendants who were arrested on March 30, 2024, and are still in jail are being held on bail amounts of $25,000 (two cases with individual bonds of $10k and $15k) and $5,000. It would cost $2,500 and $500, respectively, for those two defendants to post bond.
Which crimes require or allow motions for pre-trial detention?
Dangerous crimes are crimes such as murder, sexual battery, kidnapping, arson, aggravated battery, aggravated child abuse, robbery, human trafficking, and drug trafficking. The statute requires the State Attorney to file a motion for pre-trial detention if a defendant “is arrested for a dangerous crime that is a capital felony, a life felony, or a felony of the first degree, and the court determines there is probable cause to believe the defendant committed the offense.”
Kramer said, “Our approach to the pre-trial detention statute is to follow the letter of the law. The law sets out when the motion for pre-trial detention is mandatory and when it is discretionary. We file the motion in every case where it is mandatory. For discretionary cases, we file in cases involving a sexual allegation or significant violence. I have a policy that sets this out for the Assistant State Attorneys. I believe that this statute enhances the ability of the Courts to accurately and reliably determine who should be held prior to trial and therefore increases public safety.”
Kramer sent Alachua Chronicle a list of discretionary conditions that may prompt a motion for pre-trial detention:
- The defendant has previously violated a condition of release.
- The defendant has threatened or harassed a victim or witness.
- The defendant is charged with drug trafficking.
- The defendant is charged with DUI manslaughter.
- The defendant poses a threat to the community.
- The defendant was on probation, parole, or pre-trial release for a dangerous crime.
- The defendant has violated a condition of pre-trial release on a pending case.
- The defendant has been subjected to enhanced sentencing in the past, such as a habitual felony offender.
When is a judge required to order pre-trial detention?
Granting pre-trial detention is mandatory if the court finds certain factors. The statute states, “If the court finds a substantial probability that the defendant committed the offense and, based on the defendant’s past and present patterns of behavior, consideration of the criteria in s. 903.046, and any other relevant facts, that no conditions of release or bail will reasonably protect the community from risk of physical harm, ensure the presence of the defendant at trial, or assure the integrity of the judicial process, the court must order pre-trial detention.”
The prosecutor must thus convince a judge that there are no release conditions that will reasonably protect the community and ensure the integrity of the judicial process.
Kramer said that the process has been “disruptive” because pre-trial detention hearings must be held within five days of the filing of a motion, so scheduling has been an issue. As of April 22, Kramer said, 63% of the 99 motions for pre-trial detention had been granted, 20% had been denied, and the rest were either pending or “resolved in some other way.”
How is bail determined now?
Kramer said the defendant’s ability to pay a bond is considered when setting bail, but “it is not outcome-determinative. The Court can consider any fact or circumstance that speaks to any of these issues in setting conditions of release, one of which can be posting a bond.”
Kramer said conditions of release are based on how likely the defendant is to return for trial; whether the defendant poses a danger to the community, the victim, or the witnesses; and what amount of bond the defendant can afford to post. The defendant’s ability to pay a bond is considered but does not, in itself, determine the outcome.
The defendant’s attorney generally provides information to the court about how much the defendant can afford to pay, including resources that may be available from family members. The information is not verified by the court, but if the State Attorney’s office believes false information may have been presented, they will follow up on it.
I would argue that his bomb threats did pose a threat to the community. He should have been held for pretrial detention. End of story..
Has any one ever done a deep dive to see if Kramer has connections to George Soros?
I don’t think he has connections with Soros but he did look awful lonely in his tent this past weekend at Pioneer Days. But in fairness a lot of his choices in criminal cases make him look for liberal than conservative. Maybe he was having reflection time in High Springs.
Was curious about that myself a while back but I couldn’t see anything online indicating views one way or the other.
I believe his assistant DA was a member of the Alphabet People based on a wedding or engagement photo she posted on public social media. Might be unfair to stereotype but that would normally indicate a more liberal/woke worldview, but there were no public social media posts or anything else to suggest that.
To Bear9765’s point you would definitely not be blamed for assuming we had a liberal DA office based on what they choose (or more to the point, don’t choose) to prosecute.
How about we replace the Appeals Court judges, then? And lock up repeat offenders longer. Even if it means expanding jails or using Zoom from Puerto Rico and Haiti rental prisons?
Modern problems require modern solutions. Sending these people to rent-a-jails in Haiti, South America, etc. would definitely serve as a deterrent and ease overcrowding in our own country.
We could even ship our homeless there to work in the jails. A win-win for all.
This recent change to the 907 statute is turning Florida into California East. Very few people are being held on bond and the States hands are tied on most cases. The crimes that qualify are not what they seem. “Drug trafficking” only applies to fentanyl trafficking. A person can have 5 kilos of cocaine, have a gun and still be released with a low bond. No clue how this was ever approved with the current leadership of this state.
Approved maybe because we let lawyers run for political office? We need a 26th Amendment and a Correction section to US Constitution.
Daniel Dominguez this city has let you down, and I apologize to you and your family on their behalf. This city will allow you to use drugs, sell drugs, batter and bruise your family members, drink drunk and do a whole host of other bad behaviors. You did none of this. You posted a video that was clearly a cry for help, even saying that you were obvuously so depressed that you wanted to die. And this city let you down and sent you to prison like you were a cold hearted criminal. So Daniel I’m very sorry they let you down. I pray for you sir that you find peace and that you continue to persevere in the face of all your struggles.
I decided to look into the claims that the family could only afford $25k bail. According to a story on WUFT, his mother & stepfather live in a $560,000 home in NW Gainesville.
“The couple travels extensively and returned from a 10-day vacation to Vail, Colorado in July, with stops in Denver, Red Rock, Grand Junction and elsewhere, according to photos and accounts on their social media. They vacationed in Iceland in March last year over spring break.”
His father lives in a $296,000 home.
When’s the last time anyone here took a vacation in Vail, Colorado (the most expensive ski resort city in America) or Iceland? Little Danny’s collection of firearms aren’t cheap, either.
I’d say the statement that they could only come up with $25k was a lie.
https://www.wuft.org/public-safety/2023-10-24/emerging-clues-raise-questions-about-details-in-video-threatening-school-shooting
I wonder of they made the claim of poverty because they preferred that he remain locked up.
Once again the AC provides valuable insight to a matter of pressing importance. Thanks.
Agreed, this kind of behind the scenes reporting on the justice system is very important.
What’s not mentioned here is that the case detective has to testify in the pre trial detention hearing, causing our detectives to spend more time in court and less time solving crimes, When you have 100 pre trial detention hearing since February that adds up.
That’s a very good point, but if these people were locked up longer would there be less crimes to solve?
The answer should be yes in theory, but with the never-ending stream of child-traffickers, murderers, thieves, and abusers pouring into our city thanks to Grace Marketplace, the reality is disappointing.
Courts coddling criminals.
All this pretrial talk is hersay. If you can’t tell the differnce between someone with mental illness and a criminal then you have a serious problem with discernment. Dominguez is mentally ill and sending him to prison to teach the world a lesson is an embarrasing court decision.
It seems to me that you think people with mental illness shouldnt go to prison? You can be a criminal and also have a mental illness or be going through a mental crisis. One does not necessarily negate the other. Dominguez is right where he belongs, where he can also receive treatment for whatever problems he may have. Most crazy people know right from wrong, very few are so mentally ill that they dont actually know the difference. Your attempt to normalize threats to shooting up a school doesn’t sit well with the average person and parent, hence his conviction by a jury of his peers. You may want to check yourself in for some help as well.