Background
Aces Bail Bonds posted two surety bonds totaling $30,000 to secure Henny Jordan Bey’s release following two arrests in January 2023. After Bey failed to appear in court in April 2024, the trial court issued a rearrest warrant and ordered the bonds forfeited.
Aces later represented that it had located Bey in Arizona. It asked the trial court either to order the state to enter Bey’s rearrest warrant into the National Crime Information Center database—allowing Arizona authorities to detain him so Aces could return him to Connecticut—or to release Aces from its bond obligations. The trial court denied the motion, and Aces challenged that ruling through a writ of error.
The Court’s Holding
The Appellate Court denied the writ of error. It held that the state’s refusal to enter the warrant into the NCIC database was not an “act of law” establishing good cause for release under Practice Book § 38-23 and the common-law rule of Taylor v. Taintor. Bey went to Arizona voluntarily; Connecticut neither removed him from the state nor prevented him from appearing in court.
Aces also was not entitled to relief under General Statutes § 54-65c because it neither alleged nor proved that Bey was detained or incarcerated by a governmental entity outside Connecticut, a statutory prerequisite. The court declined to add the state’s refusal to make an NCIC entry as an alternative basis for relief not contained in the statute.
Finally, General Statutes § 29-164f did not authorize the trial court to order the state or law enforcement to enter the rearrest warrant into the NCIC database. The court also rejected Aces’ reliance on the trial court’s inherent bail authority, reasoning that authority to set or revoke bail, forfeit bonds, and issue warrants does not include authority to compel an NCIC entry.
Key Takeaways
- A defendant’s voluntary departure from Connecticut does not become an exonerating “act of law” merely because the state declines to place a rearrest warrant in the NCIC database.
- Relief under § 54-65c requires proof that the defendant is actually detained, incarcerated, or otherwise held as specified by the statute; locating a defendant in another state is insufficient.
- Connecticut law does not authorize trial courts to compel law enforcement to enter a rearrest warrant into the NCIC database.
Why It Matters
The decision confirms that a surety generally bears the risk when a bonded defendant voluntarily leaves Connecticut. The state is not required to facilitate the surety’s performance by making an NCIC entry, and its refusal to do so does not itself excuse the bond obligation.
The opinion also emphasizes that courts will not create bond-forfeiture remedies or judicial powers absent statutory language. Any requirement that Connecticut authorities enter rearrest warrants into the NCIC database must come from the legislature.