Com. v. Rijo-Henriquez, Y.

J-A20019-23 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA : v. : : : YUNEY RIJO-HENRIQUEZ; SURETY: : FINANCIAL CASUALTY AND SURETY, : INC. : No. 1256 MDA 2022 : Appellant : Appeal from the Order Entered August 12, 2022 In the Court of Common Pleas of Berks County Criminal Division at CP-06-CR-0001931-2020 BEFORE: PANELLA, P.J., MURRAY, J., and STEVENS, P.J.E.* MEMORANDUM BY MURRAY, J.: FILED SEPTEMBER 19, 2023 Financial Casualty and Surety, Inc. (Appellant), which provided a bail bond for Yuney Rijo-Henriquez (Defendant), appeals from the order denying its petition to vacate bail forfeiture and exonerate surety. After careful review, we affirm. The trial court summarized the relevant background as follows: Defendant was arrested on March 13, 2020, on charges related to an alleged conspiracy and potential delivery of a large quantity of fentanyl. … Bail was set … in the amount of $200,000, secured. On March 17, 2020, bail was posted by [Appellant]. … On October 10, 2020, a new and separate complaint for charges of fleeing and eluding police … was filed against the Defendant and the bail set at $250,000 secured in that matter. The Defendant was taken into custody when he was not able to post bail on the second set of charges and committed to Berks County Jail System ____________________________________________ * Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court. J-A20019-23 (“BCJS”). On Tuesday, October 22, 2020, [Appellant] brought a bail piece[1] in [the original case] before the sitting emergency motions judge … for signature.[2] … [Appellant] indicated on its request for bail piece that the sole reason was the Defendant’s failure to remain arrest free. On Friday, October 23, 2020, [the judge] issued an order scheduling a bail piece hearing on Monday, October 26, 2020 …. On October 26, 2020, the Defendant was brought before the court for two different proceedings. First, a bail reduction petition in [the second case] was heard. The bail in that case was reduced to $25,000 secured, and the Defendant remained in the custody of the [BCJS] on that matter. Second, in the above-captioned docket, the bail piece hearing was held. At that time, the bail piece of [Appellant] was dissolved.[3] Ethan Klein was present at the hearing on behalf of [Appellant]. He requested [Appellant] be ____________________________________________ 1 “A bail piece is a warrant from the court that gives authority to a surety, or other authorized person, to apprehend the Defendant and bring him before the Court for an alleged violation of the bail.” Trial Court Opinion, 10/21/22, at 4. 2 Pa.R.Crim.P. 536(B) provides “a surety or bail agency may apply to the court for a bail piece,” and “[i]f the court is satisfied that a bail piece is required, it may issue a bail piece authorizing the surety or bail agency to apprehend and detain the defendant, and to bring the defendant before the bail authority without unnecessary delay.” Here, the trial court signed the bail piece …

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals