Defendant is arrested without a warrant for a felony. He is taken before a Magistrate, who performs the duties set out in Art. 15.17 and sets the amount of the bond. The Magistrate also verbally indicates that Property Owner, a relative of Defendant, is a sufficient surety for the bond. The Sheriff's office says no, Property Owner is not a sufficient surety, and refuses to allow Propety Owner to sign the Defendant out.

Art 17.05 says that a bail bond may be entered into before a Magistrate "upon an examination of a criminal accusation." I read "examination of a criminal accusation" to mean an examining trial under Chapter 16, and that the Magistrate may, at the conclusion of the examing trial, allow the Defendant to enter a bail bond directly before the Magistrate, at which point, the Magistrate would approve the surety.

But Art. 15.17(a) also says that the Magistrate shall,"admit the person to bail if allowed by law."

If, after not an examing trial under Chapter 16, but a magistration under Art. 15.17, the would be surety is present, can the Magistrate approve the surety and take the bail bond immediately?

I know, or think I do, that the Sheriff approves the surety for bail bonds that he takes, subject of course to a writ if he abuses his discretion. But what if the Magistrate "approves" a surety at the Art 15.17 heraring, but does not actually take the bail bond? I would expect that the Sheriff could still make an independant determination.

Do you have a bail bond board? That would eliminate any problem by limiting appropriate bondsmen to those licensed by the board.