Bail Frequently Asked Questions
The Court concluded that there was no affordable justification for not allowing the surety more time to recuperate the defendant and ordered that the case be remanded and the surety’s motion granted. The defendant failed to appear on July 9, however her counsel stated she was in custody and the authorities had not transported her to court. When she failed to appear on the fifteenth, the court forfeited the bond and issued a warrant. After several extensions, a well timed summary judgment was entered in opposition to the surety. On attraction, the courtroom rejected the surety’s argument that the court docket misplaced jurisdiction to declare a forfeiture when it didn’t forfeit the bond on July 9.
Rptr.3d 686 (Cal. App. 2005) held that summary judgment against the surety was premature because a well timed motion to extend the looks period was pending at the time the summary judgment was entered. The Court nevertheless affirmed the judgment as a result of the surety did not make a timely motion to set it apart or take an enchantment from the judgment. Instead, the surety waited until after the attraction period expired after which filed a movement to vacate the judgment on the idea that the trial court docket did not have jurisdiction to grant it. During trial, one surety surrendered the defendant and Harco provided a new bond. The defendant immediately absconded, and the courtroom forfeited the bond.
The Court of Appeals held that the prolonged forfeiture period … Read More
