Doe

I concur in the judgment on the authority of Penal Code, section 1166 and People v. McReynolds (1894), 102 Cal. 308 [ 36 P. 590 ], Defendant’s commitment to jail exonerated the bail by operation of law.

Defendant Fisher was arrested on a morals charge, and the appellant insurance company became surety on a corporate bail bond, in the sum of $250.

The obligation of the bail bond is contractual. The surety undertakes (Pen. Code, §1459) “that the above-named defendant will appear in the above-named court on the date above set forth to answer the complaint filed against him/her and all duly authorized amendments thereof, in whatever court it may be prosecuted, and will at all times hold him/herself amenable to the orders and process of the court and, if convicted, will appear for pronouncement of judgment. ...”

A bail bond' serves a three-fold purpose: (1) it permits release of a defendant from incarceration; (2) it delivers the custody of the defendant to the bail bondsmen; (3) it guarantees the personal appearance of the defendant for trial, and in execution of any judgment. (County of Los Angeles v. *814 Maga (1929), 97 Cal.App. 688, 690 [ 276 P. 352 ].) The last above stated is the primary purpose. (Sawyer v. Barbour (1956), 142 Cal.App.2d 827, 833 [ 300 P.2d 187 ].)

Penal Code, section 1305, provides in part: “If, without sufficient excuse, the defendant neglects to appear…