Washington Legal Defense
Free Consultation
Bail Able Get 150+ Years of Combined Litigation Experience on Your Side
Hester Law Group

Bail Able

Division III has recently held that courts ordering “cash only” bail violate CrR 3.2(a). See City of Yakima v. Mollett, No. 20548-7-III, Div. III (2003). For years attorneys and defendants have felt “cash only” bail is a violation of the court rule and the state constitution. Finally, an attorney and defendant have been passionate enough about the cause that it has been brought before Division III.

Despite explicitly ruling the case “moot,” the court reviewed the matter because it involved a “matter[s] of continuing and substantial public interest.” Mr. Mollett proceeded with arguments based on both the court rule and the state constitution. The court resolved in Mr. Mollett's favor based on the court rule, thereby not reaching the constitutional argument.

The relevant portion of the rule reads, “...require the execution of a bond with sufficient solvent sureties, or the deposit of cash in lieu thereof;”

The court concluded, “CrRLJ 3.2(a)(5) does not authorize ‘cash only’ bail to the exclusion of a bond.” This conclusion was based on a reading of the entire rule while dismissing the city's argument that the “deposit of cash” clause is wholly independent from the rest of the rule/clause. The court emphasized the need to read this clause in the context of the entire rule, which results in the more reasonable interpretation that posting cash is an option the trial court may order along with the primary condition of a bond. The court noted, “If the rule drafters intended to authorize ‘cash only’ bail, they could have easily set it out as a discrete condition of release.” The ultimate conclusion was that the rule does not authorize cash-only bail to the exclusion of a bond.

Most courts I have been in recently have demonstrated their adaptation to this recent ruling. However, various prosecutors seem to be adjusting the amount for which they request bail to reflect significantly higher amounts than before, thus making the cash portion on a bond the same as what would otherwise be fully refundable as bail. In fact, at least one municipal judge recently shared that he has seen online discussions between members of the district court bench on ideas for circumventing the above rule while discussing bail. Because it's a relatively new issue and one that will remain important in the near future, the practitioner should make sure to object any time the state or a judge suggests bail is to be “cash only.” Further, the objection should be clearly articulated as based on both of the following: (A) CrR

3.2 (or CrRLJ 3.2) and Yakima v. Mollett, and (B) Article I, Section 20 of the Washington Constitution. Because the court did not reach the constitutional issue in Mollett, it may be an upcoming issue should the Supreme Court resolve things contrary to the court-rule-based decision of Mollett.


Success Stories

  • If he said he was going to do something he did it. He has integrity.

    “Wayne Fricke is a terrific lawyer who knows the law. The following are only several of many ways Mr. Fricke supported me during my time of crisis: 1. Explained the charges against me in a manner that ...”

    - Former Client
  • He always exceeds expectations.

    “Mr. Fricke has been our family lawyer for about 5 years. He has done an amazing job representing my family and I. He always exceeds expectations and informs us on everything going on.”

    - Jen
  • He, at no time, treated me as though I was guilty.

    “I was accused of domestic violence and need a Lawyer to defend me. Not knowing who to hire I started with Mr. K.W. This lawyer did not seem to believe in my innocence and I was looking at 3 to 5 ...”

    - Craig
  • Mr. Fricke had his office call me weekly for updates.

    “A few years ago, I was involved in a car accident. Due to my injuries, I hired an attorney who seemingly disappeared. I was in crisis after calling the court and finding out my case had been dismissed ...”

    - Sharyl
  • He is always honest and straight forward.

    “I hired Lance Hester to help me with 2 different legal matters. One was a felony criminal case and the other was a family law issue. In the felony criminal case this individual had everything to lose ...”

    - Former Client

Proven Results

  • Reduced Sentence Drug Crime
  • Case Dismissed Multiple Counts of Child Exploitation
  • Case Dismissed Domestic Violence
  • Four Felony Charges Dismissed Four Felony Counts
  • Reduced Sentence Drug Distribution
  • Vacated Conviction 4th Degree Assault
  • Case Dismissed Possession of Stolen Property
  • Two Restraining Orders Granted Anti-harassment Orders
  • Federal Court Success Federal Probation Violation
  • Case Dismissed Rape

Why Choose the Hester Law Group?

  • Accessible to Clients

    We understand the urgency clients have when they need an attorney. We are available  24/7 to help you.

  • We Truly Care

    We feel honored to help someone through the toughest time they will ever go through.

  • Personalized Approach

    At Hester Law Group, we use a personal approach that best suits the needs of our clients.

  • Unparalleled Experience

    We have been a successful team for two decades and have over 130 years of combined experience.

We're Available 24/7

Get Started on Your Defense Today
  • Please enter your first name.
  • Please enter your last name.
  • Please enter your phone number.
    This isn't a valid phone number.
  • Please enter your email address.
    This isn't a valid email address.
  • Please make a selection.
  • Please enter a message.