People v. Lexington National Insurance Corp.

Filed 7/28/16 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, H041573

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Santa Clara County Super. Ct. No. B1368077) LEXINGTON NATIONAL INSURANCE CORPORATION,

Defendant and Appellant.

Lexington National Insurance Company (Lexington) appeals a judgment entered following the trial court’s denial of its request for relief from bail forfeiture. On appeal, Lexington argues that the court lacked jurisdiction to declare the bail forfeited, because the defendant in the case, Natalie Duffy, was not required to attend the hearing at which she failed to appear. STATEMENT OF THE CASE Duffy was charged with misdemeanor child endangerment (Pen. Code, § 273a, subd. (b)), and resisting arrest (Pen. Code, § 148, subd. (a)(1)). On August 23, 2013, Lexington posted a $50,000 bail bond for Duffy’s release from custody. Duffy appeared in court on August 29, 2013, at which time the court set a pre-trial hearing for October 1, 2013. The court ordered Duffy to appear at the next hearing as follows: “The Court: Number 8, Natalie Duffy. Yes.

“Mr. Cummins: She’s present. Tom Cummins with the public defender’s office on her behalf. Your Honor, in this case we are requesting to waive time and continue it four or six weeks for investigation. “The Court: All right. You have a right, Ms. Duffy, to a trial within 45 days from when you were arraigned last week. Do you understand and give this right up? “The Defendant: Yes. “The Court: Yes. Looks like the case was sent here because of the time not waived posture. “Mr. Cummins: We can put it back in 87, your Honor. “The Court: I will put it back to 87. And how about the 1st of October? “Mr. Cummins: Yes, your Honor. “The Court: You are ordered to go back to Department 87 up on the second floor, Ms. Duffy, October 1st, 9:00 a.m. for your pretrial. Thank you.” Defendant failed to appear at the hearing on October 1, 2013. The following exchange occurred at the October 1, 2013 hearing: “The Court: All right. Line 3 is People versus Duffy. “Mr. Cummins: Your Honor, she is not present. [¶] Tom Cummins of the Public Defender’s Office on her behalf. “I have no information for Ms. Duffy.” The court ordered Duffy’s $50,000 bail forfeited. Lexington brought a motion to vacate forfeiture and reinstate the bond pursuant to Penal Code section 1305. The court denied the motion, and entered judgment against Lexington. DISCUSSION Lexington asserts that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to forfeit bail, because Duffy was not required to appear at the pre-trial hearing at which the court ordered bail forfeited.