People v. International Fidelity Insurance Company CA4/1

Filed 10/28/25 P. v. International Fidelity Insurance Company CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, D084948

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. Nos. SCS309864, 24CU006670C) INTERNATIONAL FIDELITY INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Enrique E. Camarena, Judge. Affirmed. Law Office of John Rorabaugh and John Mark Rorabaugh for Defendant and Appellant. Claudia G. Silva, County Counsel, and Thomas Deák, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. International Fidelity Insurance Company posted a bail bond guaranteeing a criminal defendant’s court appearances. The defendant was not present at a December 2020 readiness conference, but the trial court continued the matter without indicating on the record what excuse justified

the nonappearance. At a subsequent hearing at which the defendant failed to appear, the court declared the bail bond forfeited. On appeal, Fidelity contests (1) the trial court’s denial of Fidelity’s motion to vacate the forfeiture of the bond and exonerate it and (2) the subsequent summary judgment on the bond. Because Fidelity’s opening brief fails to mention, much less address, the Emergency Rule on which the trial court relied for its ruling, we conclude Fidelity forfeited its challenge to the trial court’s denial of its motion and the summary judgement. Resolving this matter by memorandum opinion (see generally People v. Garcia (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 847), we therefore affirm. I. In August 2019, Fidelity posted a $100,000 bail bond guaranteeing a criminal defendant’s court appearances. The defendant appeared at several readiness conferences and his preliminary examination. Although the defendant was marked “not present” in the minutes for a September 2020 trial call hearing, the reporter’s transcript indicates that counsel “appear[ed] [under Penal Code section] 977 on [his] behalf.” The trial court held an unreported trial readiness conference on December 11, 2020. The minutes note the defendant was “not present.” The minutes do not indicate why the defendant was not present or if there was any excuse for his nonappearance. The trial court did not declare the bail bond forfeited at the readiness conference. The criminal defendant later pled guilty. The trial court held a probation and sentencing hearing on February 15, 2023. A checkbox in the minutes indicates the defendant “failed to appear,” and the trial court declared the bail bond forfeited.