HENRY NORRIS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the timeliness of the post-forfeiture notice to the surety does not invalidate the forfeiture, even if received after 72 hours.
A criminal defendant failed to appear, leading to the forfeiture of the bail bond posted by the appellant. The appellant received notice of the forfei…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Timeliness Of Notice cases and more on FLexlaw
ORFINGER, Judge.
Appellant bondsman appeals a judgment based upon a bail bond estreature.
Bond had been posted by appellant for a criminal defendant who did not appear in court after notification of his appearance date. Because of the non-appearance, the trial judge estreated the bond on January 2, 1979. Written notice of the estreature was mailed to appellant on January 4, 1979 and received by him January 8, 1979. He contends that the judgment based on the es-treature is invalid because he did not receive notice thereof within 72 hours of the forfeiture, and that the trial judge erred in refusing to set aside the judgment, relying on section 903.26(2), Florida Statutes (1977).1
The case of Ryan v. State, 380 So. 2d 539 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980) is dispositive of this appeal. In Ryan, it was held that the complete absence of a post-forfeiture notice did not invalidate the forfeiture. Here, the post-forfeiture notice was sent within 72 hours of the forfeiture, so the fact that the bondsman did not receive the notice until after the 72 hour period does not affect the result. As did Ryan, we point out that we are discussing only the post-forfeiture notice mentioned in subsection (2) of the statute and not the pre-forfeiture notice of subsection (l)(a).
Finding no error, the judgment is
AFFIRMED.
DAUKSCH, C. J., and FRANK D. UP-CHURCH, J., concur. . § 903.26(2), Fla.Stat. (1977): If there is a breach of the bond, the court shall declare the bond and any bonds or money deposited as bail forfeited and shall notify the surety agent and surety company within 72 hours of said forfeiture. The forfeiture shall be paid within 30 days.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Robinson v. Swaim, 419 So. 2d 414 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)…ed to reasonable attorney's fees in any proceeding under Chapter 61. However, the statute does not apply in the absence of a marital relationship unless the matter pertains to an enforcement or modification of the final divorce decree. Kang v. Kang, 386 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). Inasmuch as the parties’ marriage had previously been terminated without any award of attorney’s fees and the present action did not concern enforcement or modification of the judgment of dissolution, an award of attorney’s fe…
-
Ortega v. State, 393 So. 2d 1196 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Norris v. State, 386 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Ryan v. State, 380 So. 2d 539 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Weaver v. State, 370 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979).…
Authorities Cited
- William Robert Ryan (Al Estes Bonding Company) v. State, 380 So. 2d 539 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)