IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSON

Assigned on Briefs October 1, 2002

IN RE: ALPHA OMEGA BAIL BONDING COMPANY

 Appeal from the Criminal Court for Shelby County

No. P-25923 EN BANC

No. W2002-00021-CCA-R3-CD - Filed December 6, 2002

The Appellant, Alpha Omega Bail Bonding Company, is in the business of writing bail bonds. The

Appellant was obligated on bonds with AmWest and Far West insurance companies as sureties. Due

to the insolvency of AmWest and Far West, the Criminal Court for Shelby County en banc, ordered

the Appellant, among others, to appear before the court and present proof that it had sufficient assets

to cover its liabilities on the bonds that were insured by AmWest and Far West. After a hearing, the

trial court ordered the Appellant to cause to be re-written each bond that it had written that was

secured by AmWest or Far West. It is from this order that the Appellant appeals as of right. We

affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Trial Judge Affirmed

DAVID H. WELLES, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which JAMES CURWOOD WITT, JR., J.,

joined. ALAN E. GLENN, J., not participating.

Charles D. Wright, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellant, Alpha Omega Bail Bond Company.

Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; J. Ross Dyer, Assistant Attorney General;

William L. Gibbons, District Attorney General; and Kenneth R. Roach, Assistant District Attorney

General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

OPINION

The Appellant, Alpha Omega Bail Bonding Company, is in the business of writing bail

bonds. AmWest and Far West insurance companies appeared as sureties on several of the

Appellant’s bonds. The Criminal Court of Shelby County learned that the bail bonds written through

Far West and AmWest would be cancelled due to the insolvency and liquidation of the two insurance

companies. Therefore the court ordered each of the bonding companies that were obligated on bonds

on which AmWest and Far West appeared as sureties, including the Appellant, to appear before the

court and present proof that they had sufficient assets to cover the extent of their liabilities on the
-2-

bonds. After a hearing, the court, sitting en banc, ordered the Appellant and the other bonding

companies to re-write each bond that was secured by AmWest or Far West within sixty days. It is

from this order that the Appellant appeals as of right.

In its brief, Alpha Omega alleges that the trial court exceeded its authority by ordering it to

re-write the bail bonds that were secured by the two insolvent and subsequently liquidated insurance

companies. We note at the outset that the Appellant’s brief is inadequate. The brief of an appellant

shall contain “citations to the authorities and appropriate references to the record.” Tenn. R. App.

P. 27(a)(7). “Issues which are not supported by argument, citation to authorities, or appropriate

references to the record will be treated as waived in this court.” Tenn. R. Crim. App. 10(b). The

Appellant fails to cite a single case, statute, rule or regulation in support of its argument. Likewise,

the Appellant neglects to refer to the record even once throughout the entire brief. Because the

Appellant cites no authority to support its argument, we assume it found none. However, rather than

treat the issue as waived, we will dispose of the Appellant’s argument on its merits.

“A trial court has full authority to determine who should be allowed to make bonds in its

court.” Hull v. State, 543 S.W.2d 611, 612 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1976) (citing Gilbreath v. Ferguson,

195 Tenn. 528, 260 S.W.2d 276 (1953)); see also Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 40-11-305, -306. In addition,

it is the trial court’s function to regulate the professional bondsmen that execute

bonds in its court, and it may impose reasonable limitations on the total liability of

such bondsmen’s undertakings in that court. Further, a trial court has the inherent

power to administer its affairs, including the right to impose reasonable regulations

regarding the making of bonds.

 Hull at 612 (citations omitted). The fact that the legislature has enacted certain statutes concerning

the regulation of bail bondsmen does nothing to diminish the trial court’s inherent powers of

regulation to act in addition to the statutes. See Taylor v. Waddey, 206 Tenn. 497, 504, 334 S.W.2d

733, 736 (1960). Therefore, “the trial court is given wide discretion in its regulation of bail

bondsmen and its actions will not be overturned absent a showing that they were arbitrary, capricious

or illegal.” In re International Fid. Ins. Co., 989 S.W.2d 726, 728 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1998).

In this case, the criminal court of Shelby County, sitting en banc, was well within its

discretion in ordering the Appellant to re-write the bonds on which Far West and AmWest were

insurers. The record reflects that the Appellant has almost 3.5 million dollars in liability in Shelby

County. Lodean Glenn, the owner of the Appellant company, admitted to the trial court that Alpha

Omega did not have sufficient assets to cover its exposure. Furthermore, Mr. Glenn stated that he

was willing to have his bonds re-written. The record contains an affidavit from the executive vice

president of American Safety Casualty Insurance Company, which already underwrites bail bonds

for the Appellant. The affidavit expresses American Safety’s willingness to re-write bonds for the

Appellant that had previously been secured by AmWest and Far West. Based on our review of the

record, we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by ordering the Appellant to have
-3-

the bonds so re-written. The trial court has a duty to ensure that the bail bondsmen who appear

before it are able to cover their liabilities. By ordering the bonds to be re-written, the court was

fulfilling its duty.

The judgment of the Criminal Court of Shelby County is affirmed.

___________________________________ 

DAVID H. WELLES, JUDGE