Opinion ID: 390354
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Applicability of the Eighth Amendment to the State.

Text: 23 First and foremost we recognize the heavy burden a plaintiff must carry to demonstrate constitutional invalidity of a state constitutional provision. A state constitutional provision is the fundamental and organic law of the state and a federal court should be extremely hesitant to overturn it. Principles of federalism require that great deference be shown to a state constitutional provision. Similarly, we must also respect and give deference to a ruling of the Supreme Court of the State of Nebraska in which the court unanimously agreed there were no constitutional deficiencies in the provision. Parker v. Roth, 202 Neb. 850, 278 N.W.2d 106, cert. denied, 444 U.S. 920, 100 S.Ct. 240, 62 L.Ed.2d 177 (1979). Notwithstanding these principles the state recognizes, as it must, that it is still incumbent upon this court to analyze the state law to see if it conflicts with the federal constitution. 8 If a conflict exists, we have no alternative; it is our judicial responsibility to make the hard decision and declare the constitutional provision invalid. To do otherwise simply out of comity and respect for the people and courts of Nebraska would be to renounce our constitutional obligation. 24 The first unresolved question we face is whether the excessive bail clause of the eighth amendment controls the actions of the states. Although there is much implied recognition that the bail clause is incorporated in the liberties protected by the fourteenth amendment, 9 no federal court has provided analysis or an authoritative holding that it actually is. We do so now. 25 We are instructed that the fourteenth amendment protects a right against state action when the right is fundamental to the American scheme of justice, Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145, 149, 88 S.Ct. 1444, 1447, 20 L.Ed.2d 491 (1968); whether, that is, a procedure is necessary to an Anglo-American regime of ordered liberty. Id. at 150 n.14, 88 S.Ct. at 1448 n.14. Few could question that the excessive bail clause of the Constitution relates directly to our constitutional concept of ordered liberty. 26 (B)ail is basic to our system of law, Schilb v. Kuebel, 404 U.S. 357, 365, 92 S.Ct. 479, 484, 30 L.Ed.2d 502 (1971). As the Supreme Court observed in Stack v. Boyle, 342 U.S. 1, 72 S.Ct. 1, 96 L.Ed. 3 (1951): 27 This traditional right to freedom before conviction permits the unhampered preparation of a defense, and serves to prevent the infliction of punishment prior to conviction Since the function of bail is limited, the fixing of bail for any individual defendant must be based upon standards relevant to the purpose of assuring the presence of that defendant To infer from the fact of indictment alone a need for bail in an unusually high amount is an arbitrary act. 28 Id. at 4-6, 72 S.Ct. at 3-4. 29 The practice of admission to bail, as it has evolved in Anglo-American law, is not a device for keeping persons in jail upon mere accusation until it is found convenient to give them a trial. On the contrary, the spirit of the procedure is to enable them to stay out of jail until a trial has found them guilty Each defendant stands before the bar of justice as an individual Each accused is entitled to any benefits due to his good record, and misdeeds or a bad record should prejudice only those who are guilty of them. 30 Id. at 7-9, 72 S.Ct. at 5-6, (Jackson, J. concurring). 31 The protection against excessive bail has a direct nexus to the presumption of innocence, implicitly recognized within the fourteenth amendment. Cf. In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 362-64, 90 S.Ct. 1068, 1071-1073, 25 L.Ed.2d 368 (1970). In addition, excessive bail is directly related to the sixth amendment, as incorporated into the fourteenth amendment, relating to the effective assistance of counsel. Stack v. Boyle, 342 U.S. at 4, 72 S.Ct. at 3. Cf. Bitter v. United States, 389 U.S. 15, 17, 88 S.Ct. 6, 7, 19 L.Ed.2d 15 (1967). As succinctly stated by our sister circuit: The right to be free from excessive bail underlies the entire structure of the constitutional rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights. United States v. Abrahams, 604 F.2d 386, 393 (5th Cir. 1979). 10 32 We hold that the excessive bail clause of the eighth amendment is incorporated into the fourteenth amendment. 11 33