Wisconsin judges impose bond conditions on defendants who are released from custody pending trial, and have the power to impose any reasonable condition of release. Because judges have broad discretion when setting bail, bond conditions vary drastically between jurisdictions, judges, defendants, and the types of charges. The problem with this expansive discretion is illustrated by the use of absolute sobriety restrictions. A defendant released from custody with an absolute sobriety restriction may not consume any alcohol or illegal substance during the pendency of their case. For any defendant over the age of twenty-one, this restriction criminalizes a behavior that would otherwise be legal: consuming alcohol. For defendants struggling with addiction, absolute sobriety restrictions can be detrimental to the outcome of their case.
The penalty for violating a bond condition is an additional criminal charge, known as “bail jumping.” Bail jumping is one of the most charged crimes in Wisconsin, but also the most likely to be dismissed. Bail jumping charges can significantly harm a defendant’s case, particularly at sentencing. Therefore, the rising number of bail jumping charges throughout the state is cause for concern. This Comment argues that the use of absolute sobriety restrictions is antithetical to the purpose of the bail jumping statute: to prevent defendants from violating their bond conditions and committing additional crimes while out of custody. This Comment highlights how expansive judicial discretion leads to over-conditioning, a practice that harms many defendants. Finally, this Comment proposes practical solutions to address this problem, all of which can be implemented without changing the existing bail statutes.
