Indiana Code

Ind. Code § 35-33-8-7 (2026)

Failure to appear; pending civil action or unsatisfied judgment; same transaction or occurrence; forfeiture; order for payment; judgment; transfer of funds

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaInd. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

     Sec. 7. (a) If a defendant:

(1) was admitted to bail under section 3.2(a)(2) of this chapter; and

(2) has failed to appear before the court as ordered;

the court shall, except as provided in subsection (b) or section 8(b) of this chapter, declare the bond forfeited not earlier than one hundred twenty (120) days or more than three hundred sixty-five (365) days after the defendant's failure to appear and issue a warrant for the defendant's arrest.

     (b) In a criminal case, if the court having jurisdiction over the criminal case receives written notice of a pending civil action or unsatisfied judgment against the criminal defendant arising out of the same transaction or occurrence forming the basis of the criminal case, funds deposited with the clerk of the court under section 3.2(a)(2) of this chapter may not be declared forfeited by the court, and the court shall order the deposited funds to be held by the clerk. If there is an entry of final judgment in favor of the plaintiff in the civil action, and if the deposit and the bond are subject to forfeiture, the criminal court shall order payment of all or any part of the deposit to the plaintiff in the action, as is necessary to satisfy the judgment. The court shall then order the remainder of the deposit, if any, and the bond forfeited.

     (c) Any proceedings concerning the bond, or its forfeiture, judgment, or execution of judgment, shall be held in the court that admitted the defendant to bail.

     (d) After a bond has been forfeited under subsection (a) or (b), the clerk shall mail notice of forfeiture to the defendant. In addition, unless the court finds that there was justification for the defendant's failure to appear, the court shall immediately enter judgment, without pleadings and without change of judge or change of venue, against the defendant for the amount of the bail bond, and the clerk shall record the judgment.

     (e) If a bond is forfeited and the court has entered a judgment under subsection (d), the clerk shall transfer to the state common school fund:

(1) any amount remaining on deposit with the court (less the fees retained by the clerk); and

(2) any amount collected in satisfaction of the judgment.

     (f) The clerk shall return a deposit, less the administrative fee, made under section 3.2(a)(2) of this chapter to the defendant, if the defendant appeared at trial and the other critical stages of the legal proceedings.

As added by Acts 1982, P.L.204, SEC.17. Amended by P.L.167-1987, SEC.10; P.L.44-1988, SEC.3; P.L.1-1990, SEC.343; P.L.36-1990, SEC.7; P.L.107-1998, SEC.4; P.L.105-2010, SEC.9; P.L.187-2017, SEC.11.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1990–2023 · leading case: Dennis Garner v. Gregory S. Kempf & Clerk of Vanderburgh Cnty. (garnishee), 93 N.E.3d 1091 (Ind. 2018).
Dennis Garner v. Gregory S. Kempf & Clerk of Vanderburgh Cnty. (garnishee), 93 N.E.3d 1091 (Ind. 2018). · cites it 20× “See Ind. Code §§ 35-33-8-7 (b). The majority takes a view of the relevant statutes that is much too broad.”
Lake Cnty. Clerk's Off. v. Smith, 766 N.E.2d 707 (Ind. 2002). · cites it 7× “While O'Laughlin was pending on petition for rehearing in this Court, the legislature amended Indiana Code section 35-33-8-7. These amendments, which became effective March 20, 1990, require a delay in forfeiture under narrow cireumstances.”
Driver v. State, 725 N.E.2d 465 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 4× “Ind.Code § 35-33-8-7 and Ind.Code § 35-33-8-8 provide the procedures the trial court must follow when a defendant *472 violates a condition of his bail by failing to appear.”
O'laughlin v. Barton, 549 N.E.2d 1040 (Ind. 1990). · cites it 4× “Presumably Ind. Code § 35-33-8-7 was added by P.L. 204-1982 to correct this omission.”
Dennis Garner v. Gregory Stewart Kempf & Vanderburgh Cnty. Clerk, 70 N.E.3d 408 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 22× “5 [13] Citing Ind. Code § 35-33-8-7 (b), the dissent asserts that our General Assembly has limited the circumstances under which a third-party creditor may garnish bail proceeds to cases in which the criminal charges arise out of the “same transaction or occurrence” as that…”
O'laughlin v. Barton, 582 N.E.2d 817 (Ind. 1991). · cites it 2× “36-1990, amending Ind. Code 35-33-8-7 became effective, requiring that a criminal court having notice of a pending civil action or an unsatisfied judgment against a criminal defendant arising out of the same transaction or occurrence forming the basis for the criminal case…”
Larkins v. State, 622 N.E.2d 1299 (Ind. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “Indiana Code Section 35-33-8-7(d) states that the court shall immediately enter a judgment of forfeiture “unless the court finds that there was justification for the defendant’s failure to appear;” but that section applies to defendants who had been admitted to bail under I.”
The Bail Proj., Inc. v. Comm'r, Indiana Dep't of Ins., 76 F.4th 569 (7th Cir. 2023). “See Ind. Code § 35-33-8-7 . Before HEA 1300, Indiana law placed no limit on who could pay cash bail for any pretrial defendant eligible for release.”
J.J. Richard Farm Corp. v. State, 642 N.E.2d 1384 (Ind. Ct. App. 1994). “In a similar vein, the trial court relied upon Ind.Code 35-33-8-7(f) as authority for ordering the balance of the $50,000.”
Smith v. Lake Cnty., 863 N.E.2d 464 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007). “The Plaintiffs also challenged the constitutionality of Indiana Code Sections 35-33-8-7, 35-33-8-8, and 27-10-2-12.”
O'laughlin v. Barton, 571 N.E.2d 1258 (Ind. 1991). · cites it 2× “7 amended Ind. Code § 35-33-8-7 to provide that a criminal court, having notice of a pending civil action or an unsatisfied judgment against a criminal defendant arising out of the same transaction or occurrence forming the basis for the criminal case, "shall order payment of…”
The Bail Proj., Inc. v. Comm'r, Indiana Dep't of Ins. (7th Cir. 2023). “See Ind. Code § 35-33-8-7 . Before HEA 1300, Indiana law placed no limit on who could pay cash bail for any pretrial defendant eligible for release.”
— Ind. Code § 35-33-8-7(b) — 3 cases
Dennis Garner v. Gregory S. Kempf & Clerk of Vanderburgh Cnty. (garnishee), 93 N.E.3d 1091 (Ind. 2018). “See Ind. Code §§ 35-33-8-7 (b). The majority takes a view of the relevant statutes that is much too broad.”
Lake Cnty. Clerk's Off. v. Smith, 766 N.E.2d 707 (Ind. 2002). “While O'Laughlin was pending on petition for rehearing in this Court, the legislature amended Indiana Code section 35-33-8-7. These amendments, which became effective March 20, 1990, require a delay in forfeiture under narrow cireumstances.”
Dennis Garner v. Gregory Stewart Kempf & Vanderburgh Cnty. Clerk, 70 N.E.3d 408 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017). “5 [13] Citing Ind. Code § 35-33-8-7 (b), the dissent asserts that our General Assembly has limited the circumstances under which a third-party creditor may garnish bail proceeds to cases in which the criminal charges arise out of the “same transaction or occurrence” as that…”
— Ind. Code § 35-33-8-7(c) — 1 case
Dennis Garner v. Gregory Stewart Kempf & Vanderburgh Cnty. Clerk, 70 N.E.3d 408 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017). “5 [13] Citing Ind. Code § 35-33-8-7 (b), the dissent asserts that our General Assembly has limited the circumstances under which a third-party creditor may garnish bail proceeds to cases in which the criminal charges arise out of the “same transaction or occurrence” as that…”
— Ind. Code § 35-33-8-7(d) — 1 case
Larkins v. State, 622 N.E.2d 1299 (Ind. Ct. App. 1993). “Indiana Code Section 35-33-8-7(d) states that the court shall immediately enter a judgment of forfeiture “unless the court finds that there was justification for the defendant’s failure to appear;” but that section applies to defendants who had been admitted to bail under I.”
— Ind. Code § 35-33-8-7(f) — 2 cases
Dennis Garner v. Gregory S. Kempf & Clerk of Vanderburgh Cnty. (garnishee), 93 N.E.3d 1091 (Ind. 2018). “See Ind. Code §§ 35-33-8-7 (b). The majority takes a view of the relevant statutes that is much too broad.”
J.J. Richard Farm Corp. v. State, 642 N.E.2d 1384 (Ind. Ct. App. 1994). “In a similar vein, the trial court relied upon Ind.Code 35-33-8-7(f) as authority for ordering the balance of the $50,000.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.