State v. Fedrico
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
1Opinion of the CourtSnow, J.
The forfeiture was judicially declared at the term at which the defendant was obligated to appear, after non-appearance in answer to calls both of the defendant and of the bondsman who furnished the cash bail. The forfeiture thus duly entered of record had the force of a judgment as of that term. P. S., c. 252, s. 31; Philbrick v. Buxton, 43 N. H. 462, 463; State v. Walker, 56 N. H. 176, 178; State v. McAllister, 54 N. H. 156, 158. See Belknap County v. Laconia, 80 N. H. 251. No irregularities in the proceedings are disclosed by the record, and none have been suggested in argument. In this…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- People v. . BennettNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Merrill v. PrinceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1811
- Dale v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1897
- State v. BurnhamSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1857
- Reed v. Police CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1899
3Cited by1 opinion
- State v. MocciaSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1980