California v. Accredited Surety & Casualty Co.Annotate this Case
Accredited Surety and Casualty Co., Inc., the surety on two bail bonds, appealed an order denying its Penal Code section 1305.4 motion to extend the 185-day appearance period, an order denying its Code of Civil Procedure section 1008 motion to reconsider, and the summary judgments on the two bail bonds. On the same day in April 2013, Accredited Surety posted two bonds for the release of Cale Maisano, the defendant in two underlying criminal matters. Maisano failed to appear in court and the trial court declared the bails forfeited. Accredited Surety argued on appeal to the Court of Appeal that the trial court abused its discretion by denying its motion to extend under Penal Code section 1305.4, contending it made a sufficient showing of good cause to warrant an extension of the appearance period. "Accredited Surety would have the court rely solely on their efforts to locate the fugitive to establish good cause. The law is well settled on this point; the relevant circumstances include the reasonable likelihood the surety will capture the defendant if an additional 180 days is provided." The trial court concluded Maisano was unlikely to be apprehended. The Court of Appeal concluded the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Accredited's 1305.4 motion. Furthermore, the Court concluded the trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider Accredited's 1008 motion: the last day of Maisano’s appearance period was November 14, 2013; the bail agent’s declaration contained information up to November 27, 2013; and a supplemental declaration, indicating Maisano had been taken into custody in Washington state, contained information up to December 21, 2013. Accordingly, the Court of Appeal concluded the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Accredited's 1008 motion.