Provides relative to conditions of providing a property bond for purposes of bail. (gov sig)
Impact
The impact of SB 234 is notable as it directly influences how individuals can secure their release prior to trial. By enabling the use of immovable property as collateral for bail, the legislation potentially increases access to bail for defendants who would otherwise be unable to afford traditional bail amounts. This could lead to a change in the dynamics of incarceration rates for those awaiting trial, as it provides an alternative method for obtaining release. By expanding the definition and permissible conditions for bail security, the bill can foster a more equitable justice system for those who own property.
Summary
Senate Bill 234 aims to amend the Code of Criminal Procedure by making specific provisions related to secured personal sureties in the context of bail. The bill stipulates that secured personal sureties must have a defined relationship with particular properties identified for mortgage purposes. In essence, the bill allows a defendant to secure bail through a mortgage on immovable property, with the terms ensuring that the security applies only to the specified property described in the mortgage agreement. This amendment is a significant modification to how bail can be structured in Louisiana, particularly for those who may not have traditional financial means but possess immovable assets.
Sentiment
The general sentiment surrounding SB 234 appears to be positive, with a unanimous vote in the House demonstrating bipartisan support for the bill. Legislators may see this measure as a step towards reforming bail practices to ensure that individuals are not unnecessarily detained due to an inability to pay bail. However, there might also be underlying concerns about the implications of allowing property to be used in such a way, particularly in cases where the property's value is contested or where economic disparities exist.
Contention
Notable contention around the bill could arise regarding the valuation of immovable property used as collateral for bail. There may be concerns from critics about how this could lead to disproportionate impacts on those who are economically disadvantaged, as individuals with fewer assets would face greater difficulties in securing bail through property agreements. Furthermore, discussions may center around the safeguards needed to protect both defendants and the state in the event that the value of the secured property fluctuates or fails to cover potential liabilities.
Bail Bonds; Bail Reform Act of 1993 and Bail Bond Regulatory Act amended; certain undeposited fees forgiven; penalties for crime of bail jumping increased; to provide further for conditional forfeitures, out-of-state bondsmen and sureties, limitations on property owners as sureties; to provide further for the definition of an employee of a professional bail bond company or professional surety company, for the licensing and duties of apprentices; to increase the membership of the Alabama Professional Bail Bonding Board; provide for a late fee for renewals; and to require applicants for licensing to be residents of this state for at least one year