No surety may execute an appearance bond or become surety for more than four (4) persons in any twelve (12-) month period (other than immediate family members) unless such surety qualifies and meets the requirements of a professional surety company or professional bail company.
If a professional surety company,
If a professional bail company,
Ala. R. Crim. P. 7.1
Committee Comments as Amended to Conform to Rule as Amended Effective March 3, 1992
Rule 7.1 provides definitions for use within these rules and explicitly defines “professional bondsman” and imposes restrictions and requirements on the business of making bonds for others for a fee. It is specifically provided that any surety shall be liable for the full amount of any bond signed, regardless of other requirements that must be met pursuant to this rule, e.g., deposit of $25,000 corporate surety bond. Attorneys, as officers of the court, judicial officials, and officers authorized to accept appearance bonds, should not be making bonds.
See Ala. Code 1975, § 15-13-22, for general qualifications of bondsmen and Ala. Code 1975, § 15-13-24, for restrictions against judicial and ministerial officers of the state becoming sureties or signing bonds.
Section (h) defines “professional bondsman” as one who is employed by a professional surety company or professional bail company to solicit or execute appearance bonds or to actively seek bail bonding business. The court supervises professional bondsmen by requiring annual certification under oath of qualifying information, including that no person having a financial interest in the business has been disqualified for any reason from being in the bonding business.
Rule 7.1(i) requires certification that the bondsman is not acting for an attorney or other disqualified person. The rule would not necessarily preclude the spouse or a close relative of an attorney from acting as a bondsman, but it would cast a strong burden of showing that there was no financial benefit, direct or indirect, accruing to the attorney. The implication would be otherwise, and the better practice would be to avoid the appearance of impropriety. On one hand, the rule keeps the attorney from being in a potential conflict of interest with his own client (as, for example, not arguing forcefully for release on recognizance in hopes of making a bond fee). On the other hand, it removes the attorney from the position of feeling obliged to make bond for a client who has paid the attorney a good fee for representation. The language giving the court power to inquire into the bonding business is within the inherent power of the court anyway, but the rule makes it explicit. The district attorney is given power to initiate an inquiry, which he or she could do anyway through a grand jury investigation, of suspected perjury in the certificate. Failure to furnish records or to respond truthfully is sufficient grounds for the court to withdraw or to withhold authority to make bonds.
Committee Comment Added August 1, 1997
Rule 7.1 supersedes all local acts, orders, and rules that authorize the approval of bonds in an amount other than $25,000 per county. It also supersedes local procedures and prerequisites for the approval of bonds that conflict with Rule 7.1.