In Re Noland

California Court of Appeal Mar 1, 1978 No. Crim. 3549Published

Before: Brown (g.A.)

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. A court may not revoke a defendant's own recognizance release or impose bail requirements without first making the specific findings in open court required by Penal Code section 1318.6.

Issues

Whether a court may require a defendant to post bail or report to jail without making the findings required by Penal Code section 1318.6.
Whether a general agreement to appear under Penal Code section 1318.4, subdivision (a) authorizes a court to order a defendant into custody without the findings required by section 1318.6.

Disposition. remanded

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The court in which the cause is pending does not have authority to require bail until the defendant’s release upon his own recognizance has been lawfully revoked.”

Opinion

BROWN (G. A.), P. J.

Petitioner seeks a writ of habeas corpus granting appropriate relief from a provision of an agreement to appear for trial in the Madera County Superior Court dated December 9, 1977, requiring petitioner to report to jail on February 17, 1978, unless prior to that date he had posted bail in the amount of $1,000.

Facts

On November 4, 1977, an agreement to appear executed by petitioner was filed in the Justice. Court for the Madera Judicial District. The agreement provides in relevant part that petitioner would appear for a preliminary hearing on November 25, 1977, “and at all times and places as ordered by the court releasing [him] and as ordered by any court in which, or magistrate before whom, the charge is subsequently pending...” and that any court of competent jurisdiction may revoke the release and either return petitioner to custody or require bail as provided in the Penal Code.

On November 25, 1977, petitioner was held to answer in the superior court for several felony charges; he was allowed to continue at liberty on his own recognizance.

On December 9, 1977, petitioner was arraigned in the Madera County Superior Court (hereinafter the court) on a felony information and entered a plea of not guilty. The cause was set for jury trial on February 27, 1978. The court informed petitioner that in order to remain at liberty on his own recognizance pending trial he would be required to execute a new agreement to appear. The court stated, “One further requirement is

[164]

this: Because so many of the Defendants have failed to appear for the trial, you would have to report to the jail ten days in advance of the trial date.” The court explained that the agreement was to terminate ten days before trial because defendants in the past have failed to appear at trial, resulting in great cost to the county and inconvenience to the jurors. The court set bail at $1,000 and stated that petitioner need not report to jail if he posted bail at any time prior to February 17, 1978.

On December 9, 1977, petitioner executed an agreement to appear for trial on February 27, 1978. This agreement contains the following handwritten notation: “Defendant must report to Jail on

In Re Noland

AI Brief

BROWN (G. A.), P. J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief