Legal Opinion

State v. Jackson

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided December 19, 1995No. 1 CA-CV 94-0302PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

LANKFORD, Judge.

In this case, we hold that the procedures for forfeiture of a bail bond are governed by Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure (“Ariz. R.Crim.P.”) 7.6(d) and not by Ariz.Rev.Stat. Ann. (“A.R.S.”) section 13-3973. We also hold that appellant Jackson (“A-Jax Bond Company”) has failed to establish that the failure to set a forfeiture hearing within the time required by Rule 7.6(d) warrants reversal of the trial court’s forfeiture judgment.

A-Jax issued a $10,000 bail bond to secure the appearance of criminal defendant Paul Allen Bowling, who is not a party to this appeal.…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Daou v. HarrisArizona Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Arizona Podiatry Ass'n v. Director of InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1966
  3. State v. BlazakArizona Supreme Court · 1969
  4. Hall v. RomeroCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1984
  5. State v. FowlerCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1987

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Arizona Department of Revenue v. DoughertyArizona Supreme Court · 2001
  2. State v. BacaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1996
  3. State v. Old West Bonding Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2002
  4. Bergeron Ex Rel. Perez v. O'NEILCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2003
  5. Graf v. WhitakerCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1998

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API