People v. V. C. Van Pool Bail Bonds

Opinion

JOHNSON, J. Appellant, V. C. Van Pool Bail Bonds, appeals from an order setting aside a forfeiture of bail upon payment of $196 costs. Van Pool contends the cost assessment was arbitrary and capricious and therefore not a “just” condition within the meaning of Penal Code section 1305, subdivision (a) ([fl] 2). Van Pool also argues the cost assessment violated the equal protection clause of the California Constitution, article I, section ?. We affirm the order.

Facts and Proceedings Below

Van Pool furnished a bail bond in the sum of $1,000 to secure the appearance of defendant Messier on a felony charge. Bail was ordered forfeited when defendant failed to appear for her arraignment. Within the 180 days provided by statute, Van Pool surrendered the defendant to the court and moved to have the bail forfeiture set aside.1 The record does not show notice of the hearing was given to defendant or the person who put up collateral for the bail bond. The only parties represented at the hearing were Van Pool and the district attorney.

At the hearing the trial judge advised the parties her intention was to grant the motion to set aside the bail forfeiture on condition Van Pool pay the cost of the defendant’s failure to appear and the cost of hearing the motion: a total of $196. The judge explained, “These are the costs that were sent to me by the auditor controller of the audit division . . . .” The document containing these costs was not offered into evidence and Van Pool offered no contrary evidence on the amount of costs. Van Pool argued this cost assessment was unfair because under state law a bail bondsman is only allowed to charge 10 percent of the amount of the bond as a fee. Messier’s bond was $1,000 so Van Pool could only charge a $100 fee; the [305]costs the court proposed to assess were almost double what Van Pool made on the transaction. Van Pool conceded $1,000 in collateral had been posted to secure the bond. The court rejected Van Pool’s argument.

The court also rejected the argument section 1305 is unconstitutional as applied because only bail bondsmen are assessed costs as a condition for setting aside a forfeiture; individuals who post their own bail are not assessed costs.

At the conclusion of the hearing the court granted the motion to set aside the bail forfeiture on condition Van Pool pay $196 in costs.