Alabama Supreme Court weighs whether an indictment alone can bar bail in capital cases

The Supreme Court of Alabama heard arguments in two habeas petitions originating from the Blount Circuit Court over whether an indictment alone can justify denying bail to defendants charged with capital murder. Petitioners John Mason Grimes and Brooklyn Paige Grimes asked the court to require trial judges to consider defense evidence that they say rebuts intent before denying bond; the State defended the century‑plus rule that an indictment creates a strong presumption supporting detention.

The question matters because the state constitution and statute intersect differently after a 2022 constitutional amendment. Petitioners' counsel argued the amendment and related statutory language mean an indictment standing alone should not foreclose bond when the defense has introduced evidence specifically negating an element required for a capital conviction. Counsel Alicia McKay told the court, “an indictment standing alone is not enough, especially in light of a case like the 1 we have before us where the defense put on evidence, to refute guilt.” Co‑counsel Richard Jaffe said, “This case presents the perfect example of why an indictment alone is not enough to deny bond.”

Petitioners relied on evidence…