People v. The North River Insurance Co. CA2/5

Filed 8/26/20 P. v. The North River Insurance Co. CA2/5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF

CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF B292403 CALIFORNIA, (Los Angeles County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. Nos. SJ4457; BA441726) v.

THE NORTH RIVER INSURANCE CO.,

Defendant and Appellant;

BAD BOYS BAIL BONDS,

Real Party in Interest and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Christopher K. Lui, Judge. Affirmed. Jefferson T. Stamp, for Appellants.

Office of the County Counsel, Mary C. Wickham, County Counsel, Adrian G. Gragas, Assistant County Counsel, and David D. Lee, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

2

Bad Boys Bail Bonds, acting as the agent for The North River Insurance Company (Agent and Surety, respectively) posted a bail bond in the amount of $125,000 on behalf of criminal defendant Marquise Marshall (Marshall), who subsequently failed to appear for his sentencing hearing. After the trial court granted summary judgment on the forfeited bond, Agent and Surety moved to set aside the judgment, citing In re Humphrey (2018) 19 Cal.App.5th 1006, review granted May 23, 2018, S247278 (Humphrey) to argue the court should have considered Marshall’s ability to pay and whether less restrictive alternatives to pretrial detention were available when it set bail. The trial court denied the motion, and we consider whether the purported violation of Marshall’s constitutional rights bears upon the enforceability of the bail bond.