Filed 7/28/21 P. v. American Contractors Indemnity CA2/6

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not 

certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not 

been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. 

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

THE PEOPLE,

 Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

AMERICAN CONTRACTORS 

INDEMNITY,

 Defendant and Appellant.

2d Civil No. B309120

(Super. Ct. No. 18CR05415)

(Santa Barbara County)

American Contractors Indemnity (ACI) appeals from an 

order denying its motion to vacate forfeiture and exonerate bail. 

ACI argues the trial court lost jurisdiction over the bail bond when 

it did not give prior notice of reinstatement when it reinstated bail

(Pen. Code, 1 § 1305, subd. (c)(4)). The County of Santa Barbara 

(the County) concedes. We agree and reverse.

1 Further unspecified statutory references are to the Penal 

Code. 
2

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

In June 2018 ACI, through its agent Goleta Fast 

Response Bail Bonds, posted a $30,000 bond (A31-0003922) for the 

release from custody of Mario Borruel-Sandoval (Defendant). The 

court ordered Defendant to appear in court on June 29 for a 

preliminary hearing. He did not, and the court ordered bail 

forfeited.

In July 2018, Defendant appeared in court. The court 

vacated forfeiture and reinstated bail. However, in its written 

order, the court listed the surety as Seneca Insurance Company and 

the bail agent as Angels Bail Bonds. The order states: “The 

forfeiture of Bail Bond filed herein on behalf of [Defendant] having 

been set aside by the . . . Court, Seneca Insurance Company Inc[.], 

the surety thereon, does hereby reassume all of its obligations there 

under.” The order did not mention ACI or Goleta Fast Response 

Bail Bonds.

In March 2020, Defendant again failed to appear in 

court. The court again ordered bail forfeited. The clerk of the court 

issued a notice of forfeiture to ACI.

In September 2020, ACI filed a motion to vacate 

forfeiture and exonerate bail or, in the alternative, extend time. 

The court denied the motion.

DISCUSSION

ACI contends, and the County concedes, that the trial 

court erred in denying the motion to vacate forfeiture. We agree. 

Section 1305, subdivision (c), provides that when a 

defendant reappears in court within 180 days of the date of bail 

forfeiture, the court on its own motion shall direct the order of 

forfeiture to be vacated and the bond exonerated. (§ 1305, subd. 

(c)(1).) However, “[i]n lieu of exonerating the bond, the court may 

order the bail reinstated and the defendant released on the same 
3

bond if both of the following conditions are met: [¶] (A) The bail is 

given prior notice of the reinstatement. [¶] (B) The bail has not 

surrendered the defendant.” (§ 1305, subd. (c)(4), italics added.) 

“Failure to give the surety notice is a jurisdictional 

defect.” (County of Madera v. Ranger Ins. Co. (1991) 230 

Cal.App.3d 271, 279 (County of Madera).) “An order that the surety 

reassumes its obligations under the bond must name the right 

surety or it is ineffective.” (People v. Ranger Ins. Co. (1996) 51 

Cal.App.4th 1379, 1385.) A court’s failure to follow a “‘strict 

statutory direction designed for the surety’s protection exonerate[s] 

the surety. The court thereafter lack[s] jurisdiction either to forfeit 

the bail or to enter a summary judgment [against the surety].’ 

[Citations.]” (County of Madera, supra, at p. 279.)

Here, the record reflects the court named the wrong 

surety in its order reinstating the bail bond. Nothing in the record 

shows that it provided notice of reinstatement to ACI or its agent. 

Therefore, the court lacked jurisdiction to forfeit bail. The 

forfeiture order must be vacated. (County of Madera, supra, 230

Cal.App.3d at p. 279.) 

DISPOSITION

The order (denying the motion to vacate) is reversed. 

On remand, we direct the court to enter an order to vacate the bail 

forfeiture and exonerate bail. ACI shall recover its costs on appeal.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

TANGEMAN, J.

We concur:

GILBERT, P. J. PERREN, J.
Von Deroian, Judge

Superior Court County of Santa Barbara

______________________________

Law Office of John Rorabaugh, John Mark 

Rorabaugh and Crystal L. Rorabaugh for Defendant and 

Appellant. 

Michael C. Ghizzoni, County Counsel, Maria Salida 

Novatt, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.