I got a letter from the attorney general of my county that I am required to appear at a hearing of scire fascias, it references the criminal case number of an old coworker I posted bail for.
I called the number on it and was told I was going to be fined $700 dollars because I bailed her out and she skipped on her court date! And that they would file annually until she turns herself in!
She skipped after apparently getting a felony drug charge afterward.
I only recoved $250 from her on the $500 bail, and wrote it off as a stupid decision.
I called her parents and they claim not to know where she is, that she is probably with her husband in South America, which they say the AG knows.
This has me furious, I knew I could be out my bail but this is ridiculous. :mad:
I honestly don’t know what to do here, I don’t want to hire an attorney for this because I am strapped for money at the moment. Can I really be fined when I don’t have any idea where she is and have no way to find her?
You’re not gonna like this, especially with your current money problems, but the best thing you can do is get the advice of counsel licensed to practice in your own state. Soliciting legal advice on an anonymous message board is generally not a good idea.
Specific legal advice aside, I’m curious about the basic question in the GQ. Can someone who posts bail end up being on the hook for more money than the bail? I’ve never had to make bail for anyone, so I would have naively assumed that I could lose my bail amount if they skipped but that would be the end of it.
I certainly advise consulting an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction. I am not that attorney, and you’re not my client, and the sollowing is general commentary and not intended in any way to be construed as legal advice. Consult a lawyer, face-to-face, and get advice about your particular situation.
Normally I wouldn’t touch a post about specific legal troubles with a ten-foot pole, for the reasons suggested by the disclaimer above.
However, I’m a bit baffled by the “hearing of scire fascias.” That refers to an old common-law extraordinary writ, the purpose of which was to force the prosecutor to show he had sufficient probable cause to proceed to trial. In every jurisdiction I’m aware of, that writ has been replaced by more modern procedures such as the preliminary hearing, grand jury indictment, or prosecutor information.
So I’m a bit curious what county and state this is, and what the purpose of such a writ would be in the apparent absence of the accused.
And I should say that you should definitely consult an attorney. It might cost you something, but probably not $700. The last time I consulted a lawyer, it was (IIRC) $45 for an hour.
As a general principle, and not as a comment on a specific case:
Let’s say Ernest Evil is arrested for mopery. His bond is set at $5,000.
He may pay Barry, the bail bondsman, a percentage of that: often 10%, or $500. The bondsman then signs a bond with the court for the total amount. The court may require Barry to post part of the bind in cash immediately, or may simply rely on Barry to forfeit the total $5000 later, if need be.
If Ernest fails to appear for his court date, the judge may order the bond forfeited. That means that Barry the bondsman must pay the court all $5,000. Naturally, Barry may recover the amount of money he’s out from Ernest, if and when Ernest reappears. Barry may be able to avoid paying the $5,000 to the court if he delivers Ernest to the custody of the court.
Again, this is a general commentary on how bond works. For specific advice and analysis of a specific situation, you need a lawyer licensed to practice in your area.
In other words, paying $500 towards a friend’s bail may not cover the entire amount of bail, yes? But then the bail bondsman would be on the hook for the total bail. Can he (speaking generally) try to recover what he lost from someone other than the person who skipped on his bail?
Thanks for the explanation. I understand the bond part (mostly from TV) but I’d think that if the OP had gone through a bond company, it would have been clear to him that he was only paying the bond company part of the total bail and he’d expect them to come after the rest (assuming he read the contract they made him sign). And it would be the bond company trying to settle the debt, not the attorney general. I assumed from the OP’s description that he had posted the bail himself rather than going through a bond company. Maybe the OP can clarify. I know it won’t help him get legal advice from the board, but I’m still curious if there is some mechanism by which the court can fine someone for posting bail for someone who later skips.
It depends entirely on what obligations the person posting the bail or paying the bondsman agreed to. The person posting the bail may have taken the place of a bondsman, agreeing to pay a cash bond up front and be responsible for the total bond if it forfeits.
This is why message board advice is useless in these cases. The person involved needs to speak to an attorney who can ask questions, examine documents, and reach informed conclusions.
Ernest is arrested for mopery with intent to creep, a more serious charge. His bond is set at $50,000.
His friend Dudley Dogood agrees to bail him out. They don’t have enough cash to pay a bondsman, but Dudley does own his own home. So Dudley offers his home as surety for Ernest’s appearance.
If Ernest flees, Dudley can lose his home. It’s true that the loss of the home is a civil matter, but because the state is a party to the matter, and because it arises out of a criminal case, the local prosecutor or state attorney general may well be involved in the forfeiture.
This is pure,utter speculation, but seeing as this kind of hearing makes no sense given what we know of the situation, could this be a ploy by the local AG to see if they can get leads on bail jumpers? I.e., put a little pressure on the people who paid the bail and see if they get pissed off at the bail jumpers and give up their location?
Sort of like the "free boat" scam that law enforcement occasionally uses to catch people with outstanding warrants, it's just barely possible that "scire fascias" is just providing an ostensibly plausible reason to get the people into court?