The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Smith, 818 F.2d 687 (9th Cir. 1987):
The demonstrators also challenge section 3013 on equal protection grounds. They present two arguments. The first is that the statute fosters an impermissible and arbitrary distinction between those misdemeanants who are required to appear in court, who thereby become subject to the required section 3013 payment, and those who are initially permitted to post forfeitable collateral, who escape its purview. They did not raise this argument in the trial court, however, and we will not reach it on appeal. See United States v. Moody, 778 F.2d 1380, 1383 (9th Cir.1985).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.