Legal Opinion
State v. Tate
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided April 10, 2012No. 108,513PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtEdmondson, J.
11 We granted certiorari to address the first-impression question whether a bail bondsman's failure to timely pay the order and judgment of forfeiture within ninety-one (91) days after receipt of notice prevents the bondsman from seeking remitter of forfeiture proceeds after returning the defendant to custody pursuant to § 1832(D)(2). Here, the bondsman paid the judgment of forfeiture on the ninety-second day after receipt of notice of forfeiture. The facts are stipulated.
12 The defendant's bail was set at $6,500.00 and the bondsman posted a surety bond for that amount on June 1, 2009. 1 On…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Jackson v. Independent School District No. 16Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1982
- State ex rel. Oklahoma State Department of Health v. RobertsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2006
- Russell v. StateSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1971
- State v. BrownCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1993
- State v. EubanksCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2006
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- ANTINI v. ANTINISupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2019
- ANTINI v. ANTINISupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2019
- State ex rel. Edmondson v. Grand River Enterprises Six Nations, Ltd.Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2013
- HARRISON v. OKLAHOMA POLICE PENSION AND RETIREMENT SYSTEMSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2020
- SMITH v. SHELTER MUTUAL INSURANCE CO.Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2013
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.