Why did an SC man get a $1 million bond for allegedly stealing cigarettes?
It will cost William Wilson $1 million dollars to get out of jail before his trial.
The 56-year-old, who said in a Columbia municipal court in November that he did not have a job, is being detained on charges that he robbed two Columbia gas stations of cigarettes. And he’ll stay behind bars unless he pays an amount greater than 14 times the median household income in the U.S.
“A million dollars is tantamount to having bail denied,” said Wilson’s lawyer, Scott Hayes.
“It’s really, really high,” said Ricky Hill, a bail bondsman and president of the South Carolina Bail Agents Association. “You might see something like that if it had been a murder charge.”
Wilson’s case highlights inconsistencies in South Carolina’s bail system. Law enforcement and state lawmakers have drawn attention to recent cases of what they say are repeat offenders being treated leniently by South Carolina’s bond system.
Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott criticized a $150,000 bond that was granted to a defendant charged with attempted murder after he allegedly pinned a deputy with his car. By paying his bond in cash, he could be released for as little as $15,000.
“What price tag would you put on a deputy’s life? I found out today it’s not very much,” Lott said in August.
But Wilson’s case has baffled some legal experts who question why such a high bail was set for a man accused of stealing cigarettes.
“If you have a billionaire, then maybe a million-dollar bond isn’t tantamount” to denying bond, said Allie Menegakis, an attorney and the founder of the advocacy organization South Carolina for Criminal Justice Reform. “But is this guy a billionaire?”
In South Carolina, judges enjoy broad discretion in setting bail, and they are allowed to consider factors such as whether the defendant is a danger to the community.
Wilson is charged with serious crimes: burglary and armed robbery. He also has a criminal record. In Richland County, Wilson was convicted of burglary in 2009 and 2015, and of petit larceny in 2018, according to the Columbia Police Department. Wilson received credit for time served in 2015 and 2018. He also received probation for the petit larceny. He received a 7 year sentence for the 2009 conviction, but was arrested again in 2014.
Wilson also appears to have several convictions in Greenville, including for burglary, “strong arm” robbery and shoplifting.
His record could explain his high bond, said Titus Curry at Bad Boyz Bail Bonds in Columbia. But other than murder, the only times Curry has seen million-dollar bonds set was drug trafficking and serious cases of sex crimes against minors.
“The Eighth Amendment (to the U.S. Constitution) stands for the idea that excessive bail should not be assigned,” Hayes said. “Folks who are charged are presumed to be innocent. Mr. Wilson should enjoy this presumption.”
The ’Hug-Worthy’ judge
In a hearing lasting only a few minutes on Nov. 9, Wilson’s bond was set by Richard Morgan, a part-time municipal court judge whose full-time job is partner at a regional commercial law firm, Burr and Foreman.
In addition to representing employers in all manner of employment litigation, Morgan has served as a municipal court judge since 2015. An article from the publication Super Lawyers posted on his firm’s website describes the “The Hug-Worthy Way in which Rick Morgan Serves the Citizens of Columbia.”
Morgan declined to comment for this article and referred The State to the canon of judicial ethics, which governs conduct that judges are supposed to abide by.
In an audio recording of the hearing reviewed by The State, Morgan can be heard reviewing the charges against Wilson, who is accused of using a gun to steal cigarettes from a North Beltline Boulevard Shell gas station on Oct. 22, and of breaking into the Gaz-Bah convenience store in the 3400 block of Devine Street to steal “tobacco products,” according to the Columbia Police Department.
In another Columbia Police Department investigation, Wilson was also charged with breaking into a business on the 2000 block of Devine Street on Halloween and stealing alcohol. It is unclear if he was arraigned for that charge at the same hearing.
A police officer present in the court can be heard saying he spoke with the clerk at the gas station that Wilson is accused of robbing with a gun. “She’s not injured, but she is fearful,” the officer said.
The judge asked Wilson if he wanted a public defender. Wilson said he did.
Morgan asked if Wilson had a job, to which Wilson answered that he last worked over a year ago.
There was a pause and the rustling of papers.
Then Morgan broke the silence.
“Based upon... multiple, multiple convictions for these kinds of crimes,” Wilson would have to post a $500,000 bond on the burglary charge and $500,000 bond on the armed robbery charge, Morgan said.
The judge denied Wilson the option to pay 10% in cash. In South Carolina, defendants can often bond out by putting up 10% of the total bond amount in cash, or the full amount can be satisfied with real estate or other property.
Wilson was then ordered not to return to the scene of the incident. Then the hearing ended. Wilson remains incarcerated at the Alvin S. Glenn Detention Center.
In the article on his law firm’s website, Morgan said “I ask myself this question, even today before I go up and sit: ‘How can I make this experience be one that they understand, feel treated with respect and dignity, feel fully heard, before having a decision issued?’ I felt that was my role.”
A ’squishy’ system
South Carolina law allows judges to consider not only the likelihood of a defendant returning to court, but also whether their release before a trial would represent an “unreasonable danger to the community or an individual.”
When considering the conditions of release, judges in South Carolina are required to consider factors including a criminal record, whether they are in a gang database and the defendant’s immigration status. They may also consider factors such as family ties and “character and mental condition.”
None of these factors were discussed in the recording reviewed by The State.
“It’s squishy,” said Madalyn Wasilczuk, an associate professor of law at the University of South Carolina, specializing in the criminal legal system. “There isn’t a rigid, systematized way of setting it... there aren’t a lot of constraints set on magistrates.”
But recent attention on the system has largely focused on instances when violent offenders have bonded out at low rates.
Lott, the Richland County sheriff, has frequently criticized how the bond system has treated defendants accused of violent crimes.
“This is another example of catch and release,” Lott said at a recent news conference following the arrest of Eugene Ivery III, who had been given a $150,000 bond after being accused of starting a police chase that injured a deputy. At the time, Ivery was free on an $80,000 bond from a 2018 murder charge.
“Ivery has a lengthy history of violent crime,” Lott said at the time. “If he were behind bars where he should be, he wouldn’t be endangering the public and my deputies by fleeing.”
Judges are not required to state reasons for the bonds they set. And in South Carolina, there is no requirement that defendants be represented by an attorney at the initial bond hearing.
Wilson and his attorney will have an opportunity to argue for a bond reduction when the case goes before a circuit court judge. But some experts think the damage has already been done.
“I would argue that (the first bond hearing) is the most important hearing in the criminal justice system,” Menegakis said. Being sent to jail before trial can cause defendants to lose their jobs or housing and they may be pressured to take a plea deal.
Defendants who are detained before trial have less “leverage” to work on their cases. As a result, many defendants end up taking a plea deal just to get out of jail, according to Wasilczyk.
Nationally, between 90% and 95% of criminal cases end in a plea deal, according to a study by Cornell University.
“These things are happening in our name as a community,” Wasilczuk said, “and there are very few eyes on the process.”