SAN MATEO, Calif. — By most metrics, Gerald Kowalczyk was a uniquely bad candidate to leave jail before his trial. He had a criminal record of more than 60 convictions, a history of failing to adhere to his release conditions and a pretrial algorithm’s assessment that he presented the highest risk score possible.
“The fundamental question you have to ask yourself is, is money a good proxy for somebody’s culpability,” said Santa Clara University law professor David Ball, who co-authored an amicus brief in support of Kowalczyk. “Are rich people safer than poor people, are poor people inherently guiltier than rich people? And I don’t believe that’s true.”
Before his plea, Kowalczyk appealed to the 1st District Court of Appeal in San Francisco, seeking his release. The case bounced between the appeals court and the Supreme Court until last year, when the high court accepted the case. Lawyers on both sides have submitted briefs but the case has not yet been scheduled for oral argument.higher than what a defendant can pay, unless the defendant is a danger to the public or unlikely to show up for court.in late 2022.
But San Mateo Deputy District Attorney Joshua Martin, who will argue the case before the Supreme Court, said Kowalczyk’s bail wasn’t about protecting the public, but was instead necessary to ensure he would show up to court. Kowalczyk’s legal team is appealing that judgment and argues that the appeals court decision muddies the water on bail release decisions, potentially throwing the entire system into chaos.
Three organizations filed in support of the San Mateo District Attorney’s Office, including the conservative Criminal Justice Legal Foundation and the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office.