Alabama Senate Bill SB213

Alabama 2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/18/23
• Refer: 4/18/23
• Report Pass: 5/3/23
• Engrossed: 5/25/23
• Refer: 5/25/23
• Report Pass: 5/31/23
• Enrolled: 6/7/23
• Passed: 6/7/23

Caption

Relating to the Alabama Bail Reform Act of 1993; to amend Sections 15-13-107, 15-13-111, 15-13-114, 15-13-118, 15-13-125, 15-13-128, 15-13-131, 15-13-132, 15-13-134, 15-13-136, 15-13-137, 15-13-138, 15-13-139, 15-13-140, 15-13-141, 15-13-145, 15-13-159, 15-13-160, and 15-13-164, Code of Alabama 1975, to provide for the acceptance of certain filing fees by the sheriff or jailer; to further define cash bail and property bail; to provide further for the arrest and delivery of a defendant to jail by a surety with no court costs to be entered on the surety; to provide that a surety not be charged for a bondsman's process or for a certified copy of a bond; to require the license number of the bondsman or recovery on a bondsman's process form; to allow a surety to sign for a forfeiture with the clerk of the ordering court; to increase the time frame for which the ordering court has jurisdiction over a forfeiture action; to authorize a bail bondsman to file motions, answers, and notices relating to a defendant who is out on bond with that bondsman; to increase the time frames for providing notice and conducting hearings in conditional forfeiture proceedings; to remove the requirement that a conditional judgment to set aside be made absolute for the entire sum; to provide further for instances when a court may set aside forfeiture and may not release a defendant on judicial public bail; to provide further for eligibility for judicial public bail; to provide further for the amount of new corporate surety bonds and escrow agreements required in counties with populations of 200,000 or more; to provide further for criminal penalties for certain unlawful behavior; to make nonsubstantive, technical revisions to update the existing code language to current style; and in connection therewith would have as its purpose or effect the requirement of a new or increased expenditure of local funds within the meaning of Section 111.05 of the Constitution of Alabama of 2022.

Impact

The bill is poised to significantly revise the landscape of bail regulations in Alabama. By enhancing the responsibilities and clarifying the definitions of bail types, SB213 seeks to streamline processes for both courts and professional surety companies. Furthermore, the revised provisions are expected to minimize unnecessary financial burdens on sureties and potentially increase the efficiency of the judicial proceedings related to bail and forfeiture cases. This change is anticipated to have a modest impact on local budgets due to the removal of certain fees, though it also sets out to define new potential costs associated with the enforcement of bail agreements.

Summary

SB213 amends various sections of the Alabama Bail Reform Act of 1993, aiming to update the procedures and regulations surrounding bail, surety, and fines associated with bail. The bill seeks to clarify the definitions of cash bail and property bail, while also establishing new protocols for arresting defendants and ensuring bail agreements are handled correctly at different levels of the judicial system. Significant changes include removing certain fees imposed on sureties and setting clearer guidelines on how sureties may manage forfeiture situations.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB213 appears to be largely supportive amongst its proponents within the legislature, who argue that these updates are overdue and are meant to modernize and rationalize the bail process. Supporters believe that by addressing the needs for clear procedures, the bill will help improve accountability for sureties and judicial officers alike. However, there are concerns, particularly from advocacy groups and some legislators, who argue that reducing the burden on surety companies might come at the expense of proper oversight, which could negatively impact the rights of defendants and the integrity of the judicial process.

Contention

A point of contention regarding SB213 revolves around the conditions under which a conditional forfeiture may be set aside. Critics worry that the relaxed criteria for certain situations could lead to abuse, where defendants might be deemed to have a valid excuse for not appearing in court without sufficient verification. Additionally, the bill discusses potential increased authority granted to surety companies, leading to discussions on how these companies will be monitored and regulated to prevent exploitation. This balance between facilitating bail processes and ensuring justice is fairly executed is a central theme in the ongoing discussions surrounding the bill.