FRONTIER INSURANCE COMPANY, AS PRINCIPAL, AND JOEY G. BAIL BONDS, INC., AS AGENT, APPELLANTS,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
FRONTIER INSURANCE COMPANY, AS PRINCIPAL, AND JOEY G. BAIL BONDS, INC., AS AGENT, APPELLANTS,
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
760 So. 2d 299
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2000)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal by a surety from an order denying its application to set aside the forfeiture of an appearance bond. We affirm on the ground that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to hear the motion because it was brought before the court more than 65 days after the forfeiture. § 903.26(5), Fla. Stat. (1997); County Bonding Agency v. State, 724 So. 2d 131 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998).1 This conclusion makes it unnecessary to reach the other arguments advanced by the appellee.
. Subsequent to the events in this case, the 35 day period provided by the 1997 version of the statute was extended to 60 days by a 1999 amendment to section 903.26(5). Even under that provision, however, the motion below was untimely heard.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Polakoff & Aabbott Bail Bonds v. State, 111 So. 3d 253 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013)…y days. Ch. 2000-178, § 4, Laws of Fla. The pertinent time periods contained in section 903.26 were changed from thirty-five days to sixty days via amendment to the statute in 1999. Ch. 99-303, § 4, Laws of Fla.; see also Frontier Ins. Co. v. State, 760 So. 2d 299, 300 n. 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (noting the amendment). . Within this two-year period, the surety may seek various levels of partial repayment depending on the timeframe of the principal’s surrender after the forfeiture. See § 903.28(2)-(6), Fla. Stat…
-
Clerk of Cir. Court & Comptroller v. Rangel (Fla. 2d DCA 2025)
Authorities Cited
- Cnty. Bonding Agency v. State, 724 So. 2d 131 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)