Michigan Case Laws
Click on the below to read Michigan Case Laws for the following years:
2007
2005
Michigan Case Law 2007
In re Forfeiture of Bail Bonds, 2007 WL 2437982 (Mich.App. August 28, 2007) refused to follow the Michigan Supreme Court’s hints in its decision remanding the case, see 705 N.W.2d 350 (Mich. 2005), and affirmed partial remission of each of the four bonds involved. In each case the defendant failed to appear and the bond was forfeited but the court delayed notifying the surety. In light of that delay, the trial court entered judgment for only the portion of each bond roughly equivalent to the portion of the six year statute of limitations remaining when the surety was finally given notice. In three of the cases, the applicable statute said that the court “may” notify the surety, and the Court of Appeals held that the failure to give notice was not a violation.
Before the failure to appear in the fourth case, however, the statute was amended to say that the court “shall give each surety immediate notice not to exceed 7 days after the date of the failure to appear.” In spite of the legislature’s use of “shall,” the Court held this was not a mandatory provision and the court could still enter judgment on the bond even though six months elapsed before notice was given. The Court stated, “. . . nothing in MCL 765.28(1) expressly precludes the trial court from entering judgment on the recognizance after the specified seven-day notice period has elapsed.”
The Court also rejected the State’s argument that nothing in the statutes authorized partial forfeitures. The State wanted the entire amount forfeited in spite of the substantial delays in notifying the surety that the defendant did not appear. The Court rejected the State’s argument and held that “Both the former and the current MCL 765.28(1) plainly authorize the trial court, in its discretion, to enter judgment in an amount less that the full face value of the forfeited surety bond.”
In People v. Bray, 2007 WL 4207818 (Mich.App. November 29, 2007) the defendant pled guilty but fled before sentencing. The trial court forfeited the bond, and the bail agent appealed arguing that the court should have considered various equitable factors in deciding whether to grant full or partial remission of the forfeiture. The Court of Appeals held that this argument had not been presented to the trial court, and so was waived, and in any event the record did not establish that the trail court abused its discretion in denying relief.
Michigan Case Law 2005
In re Forfeiture of Bail Bonds, 705 N.W.2d 350 (Mich. 2005) remanded the case to the Court of Appeals to reconsider its decision to remit only a small part of the bond. MCL §765.28.1 was amended in 2003 to require that the court give the surety notice not later than 7 days after the defendant failed to appear. The notice was given six months after the failure to appear. The Supreme Court clearly suggested that the partial remission was not compliance with the statute.