California Court of Appeal

Reset A A Font size: Print

PEOPLE v. SENECA INS. CO., B166414

Sureties who move for an extension of the 185-day period in which a criminal defendant can be returned to custody in order to avoid bail forfeiture (per Penal Code section 1305.4) are not thereby afforded an additional, automatic 30-day "breather." The fact that the criminal defendant was returned to custody while the court still had jurisdiction to hear this surety's motion did not entitle the surety, absent a showing of good cause, to relief from the order of forfeiture.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 02/25/2004
  • Published 02/25/2004

Judges

  • PERREN, J.

Court

  • California Court of Appeal

Counsel

  • For Appellees:
  •  Nunez & Bernstein and E. Alan Nunez, Fresno, for Defendant and Appellant., Frank O. Sieh, County Counsel, William A. Waters, Assistant County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Copied to clipboard