Maine lawmakers are considering whether to eliminate a criminal charge for violating bail conditions, particularly when the conduct isn’t inherently illegal.
The bill’s supporters say it could help alleviate an overwhelmed court system at a time when Maine doesn’t have enough attorneys to represent thousands of constitutionally entitled criminal defendants.
But those who oppose the legislation say it would remove an important tool prosecutors use when people repeatedly defy their conditions of release, especially in domestic violence cases.
Maine is one of only seven states with a charge for bail violations. Rep. David Sinclair, D-Bath, who is sponsoring the proposal, said it would eliminate the Class E crime for a criminal defendant who has been granted bail and violates any condition of release.
Sinclair said these defendants would still face charges for any new criminal conduct they do while on bail, and that police still have the discretion to take anyone to jail who is a risk to public safety. Maine would still have a Class C charge for any bail violations committed by someone facing a felony charge that involves contacting their victims or possessing a firearm.
The legislation is meant to apply to violations that wouldn’t be criminal if the person wasn’t on bail, Sinclair said, like drinking alcohol when they’re barred from doing so, or being out past a court-ordered curfew.
“This is literally more than a thousand cases per year,” Sinclair said. “There isn’t a single court in the state that wouldn’t benefit from that kind of lightening of the load.”
No one is promising the bill will solve the state’s problem of an overloaded court system. But its supporters argue it’s a step in the right direction. Those arguing against it doubt it will make any positive difference in reducing the backlog.
THE CRISIS
Lawmakers on the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee held a lengthy hearing Monday, debating the merits and potential ripple effects of the proposal. It became yet another battleground for stakeholders in Maine’s public defense crisis where hundreds of criminal defendants cannot find a lawyer.
“There’s a colossal backlog of cases and a lack of lawyers to represent people accused of crimes,” said Michael Kebede, policy director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Maine. “It’s undeniable that passing this bill would help conserve judicial resources.”
Frayla Tarpinian, who leads the state’s first brick-and-mortar public defense office in Augusta, said Monday that bail violation charges are redundant and unnecessary, and that prosecutors have other mechanisms to enforce broken bail conditions. They can be arrested without warrant, Tarpinian said, and prosecutors can file motions to revoke or increase bail.
“This is a small but important piece that the Legislature, you, can do to help us get that under control,” Tarpinian said.
The state has spent more than $1.7 million over the last five years representing defendants in 28,000 cases where bail violations were alleged, she said. That includes cases where more than one type of charge was filed.
Maine Prosecutors Association Director Shira Burns pointed out that the bill would likely only free up 1,799 cases out of the more than 8,300 bail violation charges filed in 2024 because most cases that year involved multiple charges.
If a defendant commits new criminal conduct on bail, they are usually also charged for that conduct.
Burns said these bail violation charges aren’t “the culprit for the backlog,” nor the reason defense attorneys aren’t taking specialized cases including those alleging domestic violence and sexual assault.
She and law enforcement members who testified Monday advocated against the bill entirely, arguing other enforcement mechanisms don’t pack the same punch.
Without a bail violation charge, Burns said police would have to wait to connect with a prosecutor before they could arrest someone for violating the conditions of their release. She said requesting bail be revoked is also a weak response.
“Prosecutors are filing motions to revoke bail, but defendants are consistently let out and continue to violate,” she testified. “The revocation proceedings do not hold defendants accountable for their actions.”
A HUMAN COST
Tarpinian told the committee about a woman who “tearfully pleaded guilty” in December to a single bail violation charge.
The woman was on house arrest and only allowed to leave for work-related purposes. One night, she was waiting to pick up a paper check at the staffing agency she worked for and was away from home longer than she was supposed to be. A police officer didn’t agree that picking up a paycheck was work-related, Tarpinian said, and the woman felt pressured to plead guilty so she could get the case over with.
“There’s a real human cost to (violating conditions of release) that often gets lost when we talk about the bail code,” Tarpinian said.
The Maine Coalition to End Domestic Violence said the current proposal would also eliminate consequences for people who violate bail conditions in domestic violence cases where they’re barred from contacting their victims.
“I think when you’re doing policy reform in our criminal code, you have a multitude of tools,” policy director Andrea Mancuso said at a public hearing Monday. “This bill is a sledgehammer. I’m proposing you use a scalpel.”
Mancuso told lawmakers that she didn’t object to scaling back some bail violations, but warned that eliminating charges for those who violate no-contact bail orders would put victims of domestic violence at risk. Most people charged with domestic violence face misdemeanor counts and are released on bail, she said.
Imposing a new charge for violating bail is often the only consequence for these defendants if they call their alleged victim or show up at their homes and workplaces, she said, asking lawmakers to consider amending the proposal to keep charges for the roughly 500 cases each year for those who break no-contact conditions. Mancuso estimated that’s less than 10% of the state’s yearly charges for bail violations.
“A defendant charged with OUI, released on conditions that include no possession of alcohol, who is then spotted by law enforcement having a drink after having walked to a local bar, presents a very different public safety challenge than a defendant who is charged with assaulting their partner, released on conditions of no contact, who is then texting the victim or repeatedly driving by their home,” Mancuso said. “Our criminal justice system must be structured in a way to ensure that the response to each of these situations is appropriate and focuses appropriate public resources where they are most needed.”
Send questions/comments to the editors.
We invite you to add your comments. We encourage a thoughtful exchange of ideas and information on this website. By joining the conversation, you are agreeing to our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is found on our FAQs. You can modify your screen name here.
Comments are managed by our staff during regular business hours Monday through Friday as well as limited hours on Saturday and Sunday. Comments held for moderation outside of those hours may take longer to approve.
Join the Conversation
Please sign into your Sun Journal account to participate in conversations below. If you do not have an account, you can register or subscribe. Questions? Please see our FAQs.