How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask TJ, Esq. Your Own Question
TJ, Esq.
TJ, Esq., Attorney
Category: Criminal Law
Satisfied Customers: 11783
Experience:  JD, MBA
9373668
Type Your Criminal Law Question Here...
TJ, Esq. is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

Lets assume that one is unlawfully arrested and confined on

This answer was rated:

Let's assume that one is unlawfully arrested and confined on June 19, 2012 and later that day released on a $50,000 appearance bond. Because he cannot afford a lawyer he is obliged to represent himself pro se. The trial is eventually scheduled for May 30, 2013. The defendant is 10 minutes late and the Judge revokes his bond and orders a capias.

When the defendant entered the court room he was arrested on the capias and confined in the County Jail for six days before his release on June 7, 2013.

The Judge refused to set a new bond or reinstate the old bond until the defendant retained counsel to represent him. An attorney was retained by family members and the Judge reinstated the old bond and ordered the defendant released from confinement.

Question: Does the re-confinement on May 30, 2013 extend running of the one year statute of limitation for unlawful confinement to the last day of his confinement which was June 7, 2013?

Hello and thank you for allowing me the opportunity to assist you.

Q: Does the re-confinement on May 30, 2013 extend running of the one year statute of limitation

A: No. The re-confinement is a separate incident. The confinement ended on June 19th when he was released. The re-confinement was based on a bench warrant for failing to appear when required. That's a totally separate matter, separate incident, and theoretically a separate cause of action (though I don't believe it is a successful cause of action).

I am truly sorry if this is bad news, but please understand that it would be unfair to you (and unprofessional of me) to provide you with anything less than an honest response. However, if your concerns were not satisfactorily addressed, then please let me know, and I will be happy to clarify my answer. I do ask that you rate me based upon whether I answered your question, and not based upon whether the answer was good news or bad news. Your positive feedback is greatly appreciated. Thank you for using our service!

If you would like to direct additional legal questions to me in the future, then please type "To VAMD" in the subject line of your question.

Customer: replied 3 years ago.

While I understand what you are saying, I am not talking about false arrest, which I understand the statute of limitations expired on June 19th. I also understand that the bench warrant was for failing to appear on time, but the confinement was based on the original criminal charges, with no bond being set.


Does that make any difference?


 


Thanks,


 


Ted Cook

Hi again.

Q: the confinement was based on the original criminal charges, with no bond being set.

Does that make any difference?

 

A: Unfortunately, no, it makes no difference. There are two separate confinements. I don't think a judge anywhere would agree that there was one long confinement lasting for more than a year in which the plaintiff was not actually confined for 95% of that time. The confinement ended when he walked out of the jail. Of course, as I stated in my other answer, that also means he may have a separate cause of action for the second confinement that would not be barred by the statute of limitations.

 

I hope that helps, and I wish him luck.

TJ, Esq. and 6 other Criminal Law Specialists are ready to help you