Bond Properly Forfeited Where Extradition From Country Of Georgia Impossible
In the unpublished case of County of Los Angeles v. Indiana Lumbermens Mutual Insurance Company, No. B212756 (March 4), the surety appealed from an order denying its motion to vacate forfeiture and exonerate bail after the failure of a criminal defendant to appear in court. The surety relied on Penal Code Section 1305 (f), which states, in part, that “[i]n all cases where a defendant is in custody beyond the jurisdiction of the court that ordered the bail forfeited, and the prosecuting agency elects not to seek extradition after being informed of the location of the defendant, the court shall vacate forfeiture and exonerate the bond…” The surety argued that it had informed the prosecutor of the defendant’s location in the Country of Georgia, and it then became the prosecutor’s responsibility to “elect” or not to seek extradition.  The County relied on County of Los Angeles v. Fairmont Specialty Group (2009) 173 Cal. App. 4th 538, 544 for the proposition that no such election is feasible if the defendant is in a location from which extradition is impossible. Division Two of the Second District Court of Appeal agreed. It also agreed with the County that the language “seek” does not require the prosecutor “to try;” ascertaining that extradition was impossible was enough. Finally, the appellate court held, because extradition was impossible, the surety was not entitled to a tolling of the forfeiture even if it had requested such.
March 4, 2010
Posted in: Blog