Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Citation
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Jurisdiction
- Washington (state)
- Source verification
- official_capture_completeness_unverified
- Original Source
- https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/893900.pdf ↗
Related Parts of This Source
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
Full Text
1,726 charsExperience has shown that the method of allowing a person to make bond with a professional surety does not accomplish the purpose of bail. The legislature in section 110-8 has determined more is needed than the mere ability to pay bail bond forfeitures on a business basis .... Sufficient, as used in the constitution, means sufficient to accomplish the purpose of bail, not just the ability to pay in the event of a "skip". The State is not primarily interested in collecting bond forfeitures, but is more concerned with granting liberty to an accused pending trial while obtaining the greatest possible assurance that he will appear. I d. at 805-06 (citations omitted). We decline to follow this line of reasoning, as it rests on a categorical rejection of commercial sureties. The Illinois State Supreme Court's decision suggests that it would have interpreted the phrase "bailable by sufficient sureties" differently had the surety at issue been a personal surety. It read the provision at issue to exclude the ability to bail by commercial bail bondsmen. Nothing in the language of the provision allows an interpretation that picks and chooses among surety arrangements, only that a surety be guaranteed. Certainly the order the Gendron court reviewed unequivocally denied the defendant the ability to utilize any surety. See Bralley, 70 Wn. App. at 653-54. It therefore negated the coequal purpose of bail to protect the defendant from detention before conviction, which the Gendron court itself recognized was a goal ofbail. 217 N.E.2d at 806. Other courts have expressed a different line of reasoning in holding that "bailable by sufficient sureties" does not guarantee a defendant the ability to bail via