Attorney Andrew Dósa Explains How The Coronavirus No-Bail Policy For New Arrests Have Affected the Criminal Court System
Oakland criminal defense attorney Andrew Dósa explains California's COVID-era no-bail policy: it wasn't absolute, but a default of release without bail for most lower-level offenses, meant to reduce jail crowding and virus spread. Crucially, a court of appeal confirmed judges kept discretion to impose bail case-by-case—so one repeat offender's release didn't mean the policy failed.
Excerpt summaries from the video and transcripts · how we make them
Answered by Andrew Dósa · Oakland, CA
Highlights
— the repeat-arrest case that put the no-bail policy in the spotlight
— why the 'zero bail' policy was never truly absolute
— the public-health premise behind releasing new arrestees
— how judges retained discretion to set bail case by case
— his caution that allegations aren't yet proof
Frequently Asked Questions
What was California's COVID-era no-bail policy?
A default of release without bail for most lower-level offenses, meant to reduce jail crowding and virus spread—not an absolute rule.
Was 'zero bail' truly absolute?
No. It was never truly absolute; it was a default that still left room for judges to act.
Why release new arrestees during the pandemic?
The premise was public health—reducing the number of people held together lowered the risk of spreading the virus.
Did judges keep discretion over bail?
Yes—a court of appeal confirmed judges retained discretion to impose bail case by case, so one repeat offender's release didn't mean the policy failed.
Do allegations prove someone is dangerous?
No—the attorney cautions that allegations aren't yet proof, so a string of arrests isn't the same as a string of convictions.
→ Full interview on Attorneys.Media
More Criminal Law answers
Legal news in California
Links to outside sources. Not written or reviewed by the attorney.