How a PR bond works — no money posted, signature only
A personal recognizance bond under CCP Art. 17.04 releases the defendant on a sworn written undertaking — no money posted to the court, no bondsman premium, no collateral pledged. The defendant remains civilly liable on the bond amount if the appearance promise is breached. The PR bond is the most defendant-friendly release form available under Texas law.
- Written undertaking — Art. 17.04(1)-(2)
- The defendant executes a sworn written undertaking — typically a one-to-two-page form prepared by the pretrial-services office or the jail. The undertaking identifies the offense charged, the court before which appearance is required, the defendant's residence and occupation, the obligation to appear at all proceedings until the case is disposed of, and any conditions imposed under Arts. 17.40-17.46. The defendant signs under oath; a misrepresentation in the undertaking can ground a separate prosecution under Penal Code § 37.02 (false statement under oath).
- No money posted — Art. 17.04 framework
- Unlike a surety bond (where a bondsman posts the full bond amount with the sheriff on the defendant's behalf in exchange for a non-refundable premium) or a cash bond (where the defendant or family posts the full amount in cash directly to the sheriff or court clerk), a PR bond requires no money to be posted at the time of release. The bond amount is set — typically at the offense-category default under Arts. 17.20/17.21 — but the amount is the defendant's civil-liability exposure on failure to appear, not a cash deposit required for release.
- Civil liability on the bond amount
- If the defendant fails to appear, the State files a bond forfeiture action under CCP Art. 22.02. The defendant becomes civilly liable for the full bond amount as a judgment debt to the State. Article 22.02 forfeiture is a civil proceeding, separately filed from the underlying criminal case, with its own appellate path. The trial court may also order arrest under Art. 23.01 and may impose additional conditions on any subsequent bond. A PR-bond defendant who appears at every court setting and complies with all conditions discharges the bond at case disposition with no further obligation — but the defendant remains exposed to the full bond amount throughout the pendency of the case.
- Conditions can attach to a PR bond
- A PR bond is not unconditional release. The magistrate or trial court may impose any reasonable condition under Arts. 17.40-17.46 — residence restriction, no-contact orders, electronic monitoring (Art. 17.43), continuous-alcohol monitoring for DWI cases (Art. 17.441), drug testing, no-firearm requirement, child-safety zone restrictions, curfew, daily check-ins with pretrial services, and travel restrictions. Conditions on a PR bond are typically less restrictive than those imposed on a surety bond release (because the PR-bond defendant has already been screened as lower risk by the pretrial-services office), but the magistrate has the same Art. 17.40 authority.
- Who issues a PR bond
- Three sources of PR-bond authority. (1) The pretrial-services office under Art. 17.42 — most common — recommends PR bond to the magistrate based on the validated risk-assessment screening; the magistrate adopts the recommendation. (2) The magistrate at Art. 15.17 magistration — independently, without a pretrial-services recommendation, the magistrate may grant a PR bond if Art. 17.027 does not prohibit it. (3) The trial court on a written motion — at any point after magistration, the trial court can grant a PR bond by order, including in cases where Art. 17.027 prohibits magistrate-level PR-bond release. The trial-court pathway is the primary mechanism for PR-bond release in prohibited-category cases.
The PR bond's economic advantage is decisive. On a $25,000 surety bond, the defendant or family pays a $2,500 non-refundable bondsman premium — gone permanently. On a $25,000 cash bond, the defendant or family deposits $25,000 with the sheriff, returnable at case disposition (less court costs and fines). On a $25,000 PR bond, no money changes hands at release — the defendant signs the undertaking and walks out. The defendant's civil-liability exposure remains $25,000 if the defendant fails to appear, but the cash flow at release is zero. For defendants without family capital or with limited liquid assets, the PR bond can be the difference between pretrial release and pretrial detention.
Pretrial services screening under CCP Art. 17.42 — risk assessment and recommendation
Code of Criminal Procedure Art. 17.42 authorizes counties to establish personal-bond offices that screen defendants for PR-bond eligibility. The screening uses a validated risk-assessment instrument — most commonly the Public Safety Assessment (PSA) — to produce a recommendation report submitted to the magistrate. Active defense engagement at the screening stage is consequential.
The pretrial-services screening typically occurs within 24-72 hours of arrest. A bond officer interviews the defendant in jail, contacts references provided by the defendant, runs criminal-history checks against state and national databases, and applies the county's validated risk-assessment instrument. The interview covers residence (length of residency, ownership/lease status, household composition), employment (employer, position, tenure, supervisor contact), community ties (family in the area, religious-community involvement, school enrollment), prior criminal history (arrests, convictions, prior bond compliance), substance-abuse and mental-health history (self-reported), and offense circumstances (the defendant's account, alibi or mitigation if any). The defendant has the right to decline the interview, but declining typically produces an unfavorable recommendation by default.
Defense counsel engaged early can coach the defendant on the screening interview: answer truthfully, provide accurate residence and employment information, document family-support arrangements, offer verifiable community ties, and disclose mitigation evidence (treatment enrollment, voluntary firearm surrender, residential-stability arrangements). The bond officer typically allows defense counsel to submit supplemental written material to the screening file — employer letters, family-support affidavits, residence verification, treatment-program enrollment documentation, and any other evidence supporting release. Material submitted before the recommendation issues is significantly more impactful than material submitted afterward in an attempt to reconsider.
The risk-assessment instrument drives much of the recommendation. The Public Safety Assessment (PSA), used in Harris, Dallas, and increasingly other DFW counties, scores nine factors: age at arrest, current violent offense, pending charge at arrest, prior misdemeanor conviction, prior felony conviction, prior violent conviction, prior failure to appear in past 2 years, prior failure to appear older than 2 years, and prior sentence to incarceration. The PSA produces a Failure-to-Appear score, a New Criminal Activity score, and a New Violent Criminal Activity flag. PSA scores are objective — defense counsel cannot manipulate them — but understanding the scoring criteria allows counsel to present the defendant's profile favorably and to identify cases where a low PSA score should produce a PR-bond recommendation.
The output is a written recommendation report submitted to the magistrate identifying the recommended bond form (PR, surety with conditions, surety without PR-bond recommendation), recommended conditions, and any flagged concerns (substance abuse, mental health, prior FTA history, weapon access). The magistrate is not bound by the recommendation but typically gives it substantial weight. A favorable pretrial-services recommendation is the single most powerful piece of evidence at the magistration or subsequent PR-bond hearing — the magistrate or trial court can adopt the recommendation almost mechanically and grant PR release.
Magistrate authority and restrictions — CCP Art. 17.027 post-SB 6
Code of Criminal Procedure Art. 17.027 (added by 2021 SB 6) absolutely prohibits magistrates from granting personal-recognizance bonds for a listed set of violent and weapon offenses. The prohibition cuts off magistrate-level PR-bond release at magistration and shifts the PR-bond pathway in those cases to the trial court on a motion.
Pre-2021, Texas magistrates had broad discretion under Art. 17.04 to grant PR bonds in any case. The pretrial-services office screening was advisory; the magistrate could adopt the recommendation, depart upward, or depart downward. PR-bond issuance rates varied dramatically across Texas counties but generally averaged 15-30% of arrests across DFW. The 2021 Damon Allen Act fundamentally restructured this framework. The Act, named for Sergeant Damon Allen — a Texas DPS Trooper killed during a 2017 traffic stop by a defendant released on a personal-recognizance bond by a Kaufman County magistrate — was enacted to eliminate magistrate-level PR-bond release for cases with serious public-safety implications.
Article 17.027 prohibits a magistrate from releasing on personal recognizance bond a defendant charged with: murder under Penal Code § 19.02; capital murder under § 19.03; aggravated assault under § 22.02; aggravated sexual assault under § 22.021; aggravated robbery under § 29.03; robbery under § 29.02; aggravated kidnapping under § 20.04; trafficking of persons under § 20A.02; continuous trafficking under § 20A.03; continuous sexual abuse of a young child under § 21.02; indecency with a child under § 21.11; sexual assault under § 22.011; unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon under § 46.04; and any offense involving family violence (as defined in Family Code § 71.004) where the defendant has a prior FV conviction. The prohibition is absolute at the magistrate level — the magistrate has no discretion to depart from the prohibition regardless of the screening recommendation, the defendant's ability to pay, or the strength of the community-ties evidence.
Article 17.028 supplements 17.027 by requiring the magistrate to consider the defendant's criminal history, including any prior bond violations, before setting any bond. The magistrate must access a statewide bond-history database (established by 2021 SB 6) showing prior bond conditions, compliance, and violations. Where the database shows prior bond violations — even on cases not listed in Art. 17.027 — the magistrate must consider whether enhanced conditions or a higher surety bond is warranted. The Art. 17.028 framework is not as absolute as the 17.027 prohibition but functions as a strong upward push on bond amounts for defendants with prior bond-violation history.
The trial court — not the magistrate — retains discretion to grant a PR bond in an Art. 17.027 prohibited-category case. The trial court can grant a PR bond by written order after a contested hearing where the defense develops evidence on (1) community ties, (2) ability to pay (showing surety or cash bond would create severe hardship), (3) post-arrest mitigation (treatment, firearm surrender, GPS monitoring offer), (4) lack of dangerousness (prior nonviolent record, peaceful behavior in custody, character-reference letters), and (5) statutory eligibility under any specific carve-out applicable to the offense category. The trial-court PR-bond motion is the primary defense pathway in Art. 17.027 cases — and counsel develops the evidence with the trial-court hearing specifically in view.
Damon Allen Act (2021 SB 6) impact — prohibited PR-bond offenses
The Damon Allen Act, effective December 2, 2021, dramatically reduced PR-bond issuance across Texas. The Act prohibited magistrate-level PR-bond release for an enumerated set of violent and weapon offenses, required magistrate consideration of statewide bond-history data, and imposed enhanced bond-forfeiture remedies. PR-bond issuance rates in DFW dropped sharply after the effective date.
Pre-2021 PR-bond rates varied across DFW counties. Dallas County historically had the highest PR-bond issuance rate — roughly 25-35% of arrests across all offense categories, driven by an active pretrial-services office under Art. 17.42 and a magistrate culture receptive to PR-bond release. Tarrant County PR-bond rates ran roughly 10-20%. Collin and Denton ran roughly 15-25%. Post-2021 SB 6, PR-bond rates dropped sharply across all DFW counties for the enumerated Art. 17.027 offense categories — to near-zero at the magistrate level for those offenses. PR-bond rates for non-listed offenses (most misdemeanors, most non-violent felonies) have held relatively steady or modestly declined as magistrates have become more cautious across the board.
The enumerated Art. 17.027 prohibited offenses fall into four practical clusters. Violent felonies: murder, capital murder, aggravated assault, aggravated sexual assault, aggravated robbery, robbery, aggravated kidnapping. Trafficking and sexual exploitation: human trafficking, continuous trafficking, continuous sexual abuse of a young child, indecency with a child, sexual assault. Weapon possession by prohibited person: unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon. Family violence with prior conviction: any FV offense (as defined in Family Code § 71.004) where the defendant has a prior FV conviction. Family-violence assault cases without a prior conviction are not categorically prohibited under Art. 17.027 — but Art. 17.292 emergency protective orders and Art. 17.293 conditions still attach, and many magistrates impose enhanced surety bonds and conditions even where PR bond is technically available.
Article 17.028 requires the magistrate to access the statewide bond-history database before setting bond on any case. The database, established by 2021 SB 6 and maintained by the Office of Court Administration, aggregates bond-history data across Texas counties — showing prior bond amounts, conditions, compliance, violations, and forfeitures. The magistrate must review this data and consider whether the defendant has prior bond violations that warrant enhanced bond conditions or a higher bond amount. Defense counsel should anticipate this review and proactively address any prior bond-violation history through documentation, explanation, and structural changes (employment, treatment, family supervision) that distinguish the current posture from the prior incident.
The Act also amended Art. 22.02 to impose enhanced bond-forfeiture remedies. The State can now pursue forfeiture more aggressively, with statutory minimums on forfeiture amounts and expedited collection procedures. The practical effect: surety bondsmen have become more cautious about writing bonds in higher-risk cases, particularly for defendants flagged as Art. 17.027 prohibited-category or with prior bond-violation history. Some DFW bondsmen now decline to write bonds altogether on certain offense categories, forcing defendants into cash-bond or PR-bond pathways. This dynamic creates an incentive for defense counsel to pursue the trial-court PR-bond motion aggressively in Art. 17.027 cases — both because the trial-court PR-bond is the cleanest release pathway and because surety alternatives may not be available.
PR bond vs. surety bond vs. cash bond — when each applies
Three primary forms of pretrial bond exist under Texas law: personal recognizance bond (CCP Art. 17.04), surety bond (Chapter 1704 Occupations Code and CCP Chapter 17), and cash bond (CCP Art. 17.02). Each has distinct economics, distinct procedural rules, and distinct strategic uses. The form that applies depends on offense category, magistrate authority, family capital, and screening-recommendation outcome.
The PR bond, as detailed above, requires no money posted at release. The defendant signs the Art. 17.04 written undertaking and walks out. Civil-liability exposure on the bond amount remains throughout the pendency of the case; full compliance with appearance and conditions discharges the bond at case disposition with no further obligation. PR bonds are the most defendant-friendly form economically but require either (1) a favorable pretrial-services recommendation and a non-Art. 17.027 offense at the magistrate level, or (2) a contested trial-court motion in Art. 17.027 cases or where the magistrate denied PR release.
The surety bond, posted by a licensed bail bondsman under Occupations Code Chapter 1704 and CCP Chapter 17, requires a non-refundable premium — typically 10% of the bond amount in DFW (some bondsmen 8% for low-risk cases, 12-15% for high-risk). On a $25,000 bond, the bondsman premium is $2,500 paid permanently; the bondsman posts the full $25,000 with the sheriff. The bondsman may also require collateral (real property lien, vehicle title, family co-signer) for higher-risk cases. The bondsman is liable for the full bond amount if the defendant fails to appear and pursues recovery from the defendant or co-signer. Surety bonds dominate the DFW bond market for misdemeanors and lower-grade felonies where PR bond is unavailable but the family lacks the capital for a full cash bond.
The cash bond under CCP Art. 17.02 requires the defendant or a third party to deposit the full bond amount in cash directly to the sheriff or court clerk. On case disposition, the cash is returned to the depositor (less court costs and fines if owed) under Art. 17.02. Cash bonds avoid the bondsman premium but require the full amount in liquid funds. Cash bonds also produce a returnable asset — at case disposition, the depositor recovers the deposit, making the cash bond a deferred-cost option rather than a permanent expense. Texas counties typically accept cash bonds up to a county-set ceiling without bondsman involvement; above the ceiling, surety bonds dominate. Cash bonds avoid the bondsman's recovery rights — the defendant has direct relationship only with the court.
Strategic selection depends on offense category, family capital, and screening outcome. Where Art. 17.027 prohibits magistrate-level PR bond and the family has $5,000 of liquid capital, the choice is between (1) surety bond on, say, a $50,000 bond — paying $5,000 premium permanently — or (2) a trial-court PR-bond motion. Where the trial-court motion succeeds, the family saves the $5,000. Where it fails, the family pays the $5,000 surety premium with no additional time in custody. The expected-value calculation usually favors pursuing the PR-bond motion aggressively — particularly because the same evidentiary development supports a bond-reduction motion if PR is later denied. Counsel typically structures the engagement to pursue PR-bond first, with bond-reduction as the fallback, and surety bond as the worst-case backstop.
PR bond conditions — typical conditions imposed at magistration
A PR bond is not unconditional release. The magistrate or trial court may impose any reasonable condition under CCP Arts. 17.40-17.46 — residence restriction, no-contact orders, electronic monitoring, continuous-alcohol monitoring, drug testing, no-firearm requirement, child-safety zone restrictions, curfew, and pretrial-services check-ins. Condition compliance is mandatory; violation can ground bond revocation.
The most common PR-bond conditions in DFW track the offense category. For DWI cases under Penal Code § 49.04, the standard conditions are (1) ignition-interlock installation under CCP Art. 17.441, (2) continuous-alcohol monitoring (SCRAM bracelet) at the defendant's expense ($12-18/day), (3) no-driving restriction except for work and treatment, (4) substance-abuse evaluation and treatment, and (5) drug testing on a fixed schedule (typically weekly random). For family-violence cases under Penal Code §§ 22.01(a-1) and 22.01(b)(2), the standard conditions are (1) Art. 17.292 emergency protective order or Art. 17.293 conditions, (2) no-contact with the alleged victim and any protected family members, (3) BIPP (Battering Intervention and Prevention Program) enrollment, (4) firearm surrender to a non-prohibited third party with documented transfer under Art. 17.292(c), and (5) residence restriction (defendant cannot return to the shared residence with the protected party).
For drug cases under Health and Safety Code Chapter 481, the standard conditions are (1) substance-abuse evaluation and treatment, (2) drug testing on a fixed schedule, (3) employment or treatment-program participation, and (4) travel restrictions. For weapon cases under Penal Code Chapter 46, the standard conditions are (1) no-firearm requirement, (2) firearm surrender to a non-prohibited third party, and (3) residence restriction where the residence has firearms present. For property-crime cases under Penal Code Chapter 31, the standard conditions are typically minimal — residence restriction, no-contact with alleged victim if applicable, and pretrial-services check-ins.
Electronic monitoring under CCP Art. 17.43 is increasingly common as a PR-bond condition. GPS ankle bracelet monitoring runs $10-15/day from private providers in DFW, paid by the defendant or family. The bracelet reports location data to pretrial services in real-time; violation (leaving an approved zone, tampering, battery failure) triggers an alert that can ground bond revocation under Art. 17.40 or 17.43. Counsel can propose GPS monitoring as a PR-bond condition where the prosecutor or magistrate has expressed concerns about flight risk or community safety — the monitoring directly addresses the concern and often unlocks PR release in cases where outright unmonitored PR would be denied.
Curfew and travel restrictions are commonly imposed in cases involving young defendants, defendants with prior FTA history, or cases with significant flight-risk indicators. Curfew typically runs from late evening (10 PM-12 AM) to early morning (5-7 AM), with exceptions for work and treatment. Travel restrictions typically prohibit leaving the county or the four-county DFW area without court permission. Both conditions are monitored by pretrial services under Art. 17.42 and can be enforced through GPS monitoring or daily check-ins. Violation of either condition is grounds for bond revocation under Art. 17.40.
Bond conditions can be modified by motion at any time. Where the defendant has complied with all conditions for 60-90 days and the case has not yet reached disposition, counsel can file a motion to relax or remove specific conditions — for example, modifying a no-contact order to permit supervised contact with children, reducing curfew restrictions to permit night-shift employment, terminating GPS monitoring after consistent compliance, or removing residence restrictions to permit relocation for employment. The motion to modify is heard by the trial court of original disposition; the standard is whether the existing condition is still reasonably necessary to secure appearance or protect victim/community safety in light of the defendant's compliance and any changed circumstances.
Motion to grant PR bond after denial — procedural pathway
Where the magistrate denies PR bond at magistration — whether because of an Art. 17.027 prohibition, an unfavorable screening recommendation, or a discretionary departure — the defense pathway is a written motion to the trial court of original disposition. The motion is filed under CCP Art. 17.04 and Art. 17.42, requesting trial-court PR-bond release subject to any reasonable conditions under Arts. 17.40-17.46.
Filing venue depends on case posture. Pre-indictment misdemeanor cases sit with the county-court-at-law magistrate; pre-indictment felony cases sit with the impaneled felony magistrate or, in some counties, directly with a district court on transfer. Post-indictment cases sit with the trial court of original jurisdiction. The motion is captioned "Defendant's Motion for Release on Personal Bond" or "Defendant's Motion for Personal Recognizance Bond" and recites (1) the current bond amount and form (typically surety), (2) the date of magistration and the magistrate's ruling (typically a magistrate denial of PR bond), (3) the Art. 17.04 statutory framework, (4) the Art. 17.42 pretrial-services recommendation (if any), (5) the defendant's community-ties, employment, and family-support evidence, (6) the defendant's ability-to-pay analysis showing surety or cash bond would create severe hardship, (7) post-arrest mitigation evidence, and (8) the specific conditions the defense proposes under Arts. 17.40-17.46.
The motion is filed within 3-10 days of magistration after counsel is engaged and documentation is assembled. The hearing is typically scheduled within 7-14 days of filing. No statutory waiting period applies. The motion can be re-filed at any time if circumstances change — a new employment offer, a treatment-program acceptance, a successful weeks-of-compliance demonstration with current surety-bond conditions (if the defendant has bonded out on surety), or a change in case posture (indictment for a lesser charge, count dismissal) all support re-filing. There is no limit on the number of PR-bond motions a defendant can file.
The hearing is an evidentiary proceeding under the Texas Rules of Evidence. The defense calls witnesses (defendant, family members, employer, treatment-program coordinator, character references), introduces documentary exhibits (financial documentation, community-ties evidence, compliance records, mitigation evidence, GPS-monitoring provider documentation if proposed), and argues each Art. 17.04, 17.15, and 17.42 framework explicitly. The State responds by emphasizing offense gravity, prior criminal history, victim/community safety concerns, and any flight-risk indicators. Where the case falls under Art. 17.027 prohibited categories, the State may argue that the trial court should follow the magistrate-level prohibition rationale even though the trial court is not strictly bound by it.
The trial court has broad discretion to grant PR bond even in Art. 17.027 prohibited-category cases. The standard of review on appeal is abuse of discretion. The trial court typically issues specific findings supporting the PR-bond grant — particularly in Art. 17.027 cases where the magistrate-level prohibition signals legislative concern. Findings typically address (1) the strength of community-ties evidence, (2) the documented ability-to-pay constraint, (3) the post-arrest mitigation in place, (4) the proposed condition package (GPS monitoring, residence restriction, no-contact verification, drug testing) and how it addresses public-safety concerns, (5) the defendant's lack of dangerousness based on record and conduct, and (6) the constitutional and statutory framework supporting release. Counsel proposes specific findings in a draft order submitted with the motion — substantially increasing the likelihood the court adopts the framework verbatim if it grants relief.
Trial-court reconsideration and habeas pathway under CCP Art. 11.08
Where a trial-court PR-bond motion is denied, two appellate pathways exist: reconsideration on changed circumstances and pretrial habeas under CCP Arts. 11.08 (felony) or 11.09 (misdemeanor). Habeas alleges constitutional violation — the Eighth Amendment's excessive-bail clause and Tex. Const. Art. I §§ 11, 11a — and provides immediate appellate review under Tex. R. App. P. 31.
Reconsideration of a denied PR-bond motion is available on changed circumstances. CCP Chapter 17 imposes no limit on the number of bond motions a defendant can file. New evidence — new employment, treatment-program enrollment and progress, weeks of compliance with current surety-bond conditions, dismissal of counts, indictment for a lesser charge, character-reference development, or any post-arrest mitigation that was not in place at the original hearing — supports re-filing. The reconsideration motion is captioned similarly to the original motion with additional language identifying the changed circumstances and the new evidence developed. The hearing is typically scheduled within 14-21 days. The same trial court that denied the original motion will typically hear the reconsideration, though some counties rotate magistrates or judges.
The pretrial habeas pathway under CCP Art. 11.08 (felony) or 11.09 (misdemeanor) is the constitutional pathway. The application alleges that the current bond — typically a surety bond at a level the defendant cannot pay — violates the Eighth Amendment's excessive-bail clause, Tex. Const. Art. I §§ 11 and 11a, and CCP Art. 17.15. The argument is that where Art. 17.027 prohibits magistrate-level PR bond and the family lacks the capital for a surety or cash bond at the magistrate-set amount, and the trial court has denied PR-bond release, the cumulative effect is unconstitutional pretrial detention based on inability to pay. Stack v. Boyle, 342 U.S. 1 (1951), and Ex parte Bogia, 56 S.W.3d 835 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001), supply the constitutional framework; Ex parte Rubac, 611 S.W.2d 848 (Tex. Crim. App. 1981), supplies the Texas appellate-review framework.
The habeas application is filed in the trial court but the appellate path is immediate. An order denying habeas relief is independently appealable under Tex. R. App. P. 31 to the appropriate court of appeals (typically 60-120 days) and then to the Court of Criminal Appeals on petition for discretionary review (30-60 additional days). The habeas application is the right vehicle when (1) the trial court has denied a PR-bond motion and the defense wants appellate review without waiting for case disposition, (2) the case has Art. 17.027 prohibited-category implications that warrant constitutional scrutiny, or (3) the existing surety/cash bond is documentably above the family's ability to pay and the other Art. 17.15 factors do not justify the differential. Ex parte Brown, 959 S.W.2d 369 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1998), requires a bond-reduction or PR-bond motion to be filed and ruled on before habeas — the motion-first sequence is jurisdictional.
Strategic sequencing typically runs: (1) magistration PR-bond request to the magistrate — denied because of Art. 17.027 or unfavorable screening; (2) trial-court PR-bond motion within 3-10 days of magistration — heard within 7-14 days; (3) if denied, reconsideration on changed circumstances within 30-60 days OR pretrial habeas application alleging excessive-bail violation; (4) if habeas denied, appeal under Tex. R. App. P. 31. Counsel may also pursue parallel bond-reduction motions (seeking a reduction of the surety bond rather than PR bond) where the family has some capital available and the strategic objective is to lower the surety amount to an affordable range. The bond-reduction motion runs on the Art. 17.15 framework; the PR-bond motion runs on the Art. 17.04 and 17.42 framework; the two motions are complementary and can be pursued in parallel or in sequence.
