Citizen Portal
Sign In

Committee favors giving judges discretion over secured bonds, amends technical language and reports bill (8–1)

House Courts, Criminal Law Subcommittee (Virginia) · January 28, 2026

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The subcommittee amended HB357 to remove mandatory secured‑bond rules so judges can weigh individual risk factors when setting secured versus unsecured bonds; supporters said the change restores judicial discretion and avoids disparate impacts.

Delegate Colson presented HB357 with a clarifying line amendment to the language that would be added to Va. Code §19.2‑120 regarding a defendant’s probation or parole status. The bill eliminates a presumption of mandatory secured bonds tied to prior convictions and instead allows magistrates and judges to determine whether a secured or unsecured bond is appropriate based on individualized risk factors.

Supporters including Class Justice for Virginia, Legal Aid Justice Center and community groups argued mandatory secured bonds are overly broad, disparately impact low‑income individuals and restrict judicial discretion. The substitute and technical amendment were adopted. The subcommittee reported HB357 with amendments by a recorded vote of 8–1.