JAMES C. KEEFE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE; VERNA DUNN, 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.
Two sureties on criminal bonds appealed denials of their motions to set aside bond estreatures after the underlying forfeitures were reduced to judgment. The court affirmed, holding that once a bond forfeiture is reduced to judgment by the circuit court, the court of record lacks jurisdiction to set aside the estreature.
The court of record lacks jurisdiction to set aside a bond estreature after the forfeiture has been reduced to judgment by the circuit court. Once forfeiture is reduced to judgment, the applicable statutory framework is section 903.271, not section 903.27, and jurisdiction to address the judgment rests with the court that entered it.
“Once the forfeiture has been reduced to judgment the applicable statutory provision is that section concerned with remission of judgment and not the provision dealing with remission of forfeiture.”
Establishes the key distinction that the proper statutory framework changes after judgment is entered, shifting jurisdiction away from the court of record.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJames C. Keefe was a surety on two bonds for defendant William Zeigler, who failed to appear for trial. The Court of Record granted estreature of both…
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 Bond Estreature cases and more on FLexlaw
These are consolidated appeals by James C. Keefe and Verna Dunn from final orders entered by the Court of Record for Brevard County denying their respective motions to set aside bond estreatures.
James C. Keefe is the surety on two bonds assuring the appearance of William Zeigler for trial on two separate criminal cases in the Brevard County Court of Record. The defendant failed to appear for trial on the designated date, and the Court of Record granted the estreature of the two bonds and filed a certificate of bond estreature on November 13, 1964. The forfeiture on the two bonds was reduced to judgment entered in the Circuit Court for Brevard County on November 19, 1964.
*869Verna Dunn is the surety on a bond assuring the appearance of Bobby W. Gill for trial in a criminal case in the Brevard County Court of Record. The trial court’s order recites that a certificate of bond estreature was filed July 28, 1965, and that the forfeiture was reduced to judgment entered in the circuit court on July 30, 1965. Petitioner Dunn’s motion to set aside the bond estreature was filed on May 5, 1965, but notice of hearing was not filed until August 18, 1965, approximately nineteen ■days after the entry of the judgment of forfeiture by the circuit court.
The court of record denied petitioners’ respective motions to set aside the bond estreatures on the ground that the court of record is without jurisdiction to set aside a bond estreature after the forfeiture of the bond has been reduced to judgment by the circuit court pursuant to F.S.A. § 903.27.
Once the forfeiture has been reduced to judgment the applicable statutory provision is that section concerned with remission of judgment and not the provision dealing with remission of forfeiture. Therefore, these cases are not governed by F.S.A. § 903.27, as amended in 1961, but are governed by F.S.A. § 903.271 (1961), which provided that no remission shall be made where a forfeiture has been reduced to judgment. If the 1965 amendment, F.S.A. § 903.271, effective July 1, 1965, applies, then the court entering the judgment of forfeiture is the proper court in which application to set aside the judgment must be filed.
Under either provision the court of record does not have jurisdiction to set aside a bond estreature after the forfeiture has been reduced to judgment. The court of record’s orders denying petitioners’ respective motions to set aside the bond estreature are correct.
Affirmed.
SMITH, C. J., and ANDREWS and WALDEN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Resolute Ins. Co. v. State, 289 So. 2d 456 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)…rial court no longer has jurisdiction to relieve from the forfeiture. See South American Fire Insurance Company v. State, Fla.App.1972, 270 So. 2d 374. In addition, the District Court of Appeal, Fourth District, held in Keefe v. State, Fla.App.1966, 188 So. 2d 868, that once the forfeiture has been reduced to judgment the applicable statutory section is that section concerned with the setting aside of judgment and not the section dealing with remission of forfeiture. It appears that the State may well be abl…
-
S. Am. Fire Ins. Co. v. The State of Fla. for the Use & Benefit of Dade Cnty., 270 So. 2d 374 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)…ircuit court had reduced the order of forfeiture to final judgment, the criminal court of record was, again, without jurisdiction to set aside the bond estreature. That jurisdiction rested solely with the circuit court. Keefe v. State, Fla.App.1966, 188 So. 2d 868. As to the other contention of the appellant we find that the record in this case falls short of that which would be necessary to authorize the setting aside of a judgment of estreature entered pursuant to Ch. 903, Fla.Stat., F.S.A. City of Miami B…