State v. Kramer
Washington Supreme Court
1DissentFairhurst, J.
¶21 (dissenting) — Under the majority’s decision, a surety is now free to ignore, or even be complicit in, a defendant’s failure to show up for court-ordered appearances for a 60-day period without concern that its bond moneys will not be returned. The majority’s decision rewrites Washington’s bail bond statutes and dangerously undercuts the financial incentive for sureties to ensure defendants comply with the terms of bail. In doing so, the majority’s decision fails to respect the balance of incentives for sureties spelled out by the legislature in chapter 10.19 RCW and undermines the…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Davis v. Globe MacHine Manufacturing Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1984
- State v. JackschitzWashington Supreme Court · 1913
- State v. JohnsonWashington Supreme Court · 1912
- Matter of Marriage of BralleyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1993
- State v. HeslinWashington Supreme Court · 1964
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.