Legal Opinion
Umatilla County v. RESOLUTE INSURANCE COMPANY
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided February 4, 1972PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSchwab, C. J.
ORS 140.610 provides, with regard to bad, that:
“If, without sufficient excuse, the defendant fails to appear * * * upon any * * * occasion when his presence in court is lawfully required * * * bail * * * is thereupon forfeited.” (Emphasis supplied.)
The question on appeal is: When a criminal defendant, free on bail, is convicted and imprisoned in a foreign state, and because of the imprisonment does not appear before the Oregon court at the time appointed, is the forfeiture of bail improper as a matter of law? ① We hold that it is not.
Two men, following arraignment in Umatilla County for…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Taylor v. TaintorSupreme Court of the United States · 1873
- State v. GardnerOregon Supreme Court · 1896
- Umatilla County v. United Bonding InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1967
3Cited by12 opinions
- State v. AgronSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2016
- Pinellas County v. RobertsonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1986
- State v. SheriffSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2011
- State v. MottoleseSupreme Court of Vermont · 2015
- State v. SeybertMontana Supreme Court · 1987
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.