California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Wilshire Ins. Co., 132 Cal.Rptr. 19, 61 Cal.App.3d 51 (Cal. App. 1976):
[61 Cal.App.3d 60] The surety directs our attention to language in People v. Wilshire Ins. Co., 46 Cal.App.3d 216, 221, 119 Cal.Rptr. 917, indicating that a court may not have authority to reinstate bail 'upon its own motion' after a discharge of forfeiture because the rights of the surety may be adversely affected. In that case, the clerk of court had neglected to mail a notice of forfeiture to the surety. The reviewing court held that the failure to give the statutory notice compelled the conclusion that the surety was relieved of liability. The court's observation that '(a) cogent argument can be made' that the trial court 'did not have the authority to reinstate the bail Upon its own motion after discharge of the forfeiture' was purely gratuitous. (46 Cal.App.3d at 221, 119 Cal.Rptr. at p. 919; original emphasis.) The court itself cautioned that it did not purport to 'finally rule' on the issue. Furthermore, the bail bond involved in that case, as well as the proceeding to discharge the forfeiture, antedated the 1972 amendment to section 1305 expressly empowering a court to reinstate bail and release the defendant on the same bond.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.