Com. v. Bautista

Commonwealth v. Bautista
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
April 11, 2011
459 Mass. 306

Bail, Surety.

Ernest Solomon appeals an order of bail forfeiture after the United States Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement took the defendant in the case into custody.  The Supreme Judicial Court concluded that Solomon could not prove that an act of the United States government caused the defendant’s default.  Therefore, the exception to the rule regarding the forfeiture of bail because noted in G.L.c. 276 § 70 did not apply.  Furthermore, the Court rejected the defendant’s argument that order of the bail forfeiture was improper because the court ordered the forfeiture instead of the Commonwealth requesting it.

Com v. Gomez

Commonwealth v. Yohan Gomez
Massachusetts Appeals Court
January 11, 2011

Docket No: 09-P-1938

Bail, Default, Forfeiture

While released on bail and during his jury trial, police arrested defendant for an unrelated offense and detained him.  Defendant was unable to appear in trial court due to this police custody and defaulted at trial.  Defendant appeals the trial judge’s order forfeiting the bail.  The Appeals Court reversed under these circumstances.