Alabama House Bill HB405

Alabama 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/5/26
• Refer: 2/5/26
• Report Pass: 2/25/26
• Refer: 3/5/26
• Report Pass: 3/11/26
• Enrolled: 3/19/26
• Passed: 3/31/26

Caption

Crimes and offenses; bail jumping in the third degree, established

Summary

HB405 creates a new offense in Alabama law called bail jumping in the third degree. The bill applies to a person who has been lawfully released from custody, with or without bail, and who is subject to court-ordered electronic monitoring but violates any condition of that monitoring. It also provides a defense if the violation was unintentional or unavoidable due to circumstances beyond the defendant’s control, with the defendant bearing the burden of raising that defense. The bill classifies this offense as a Class C misdemeanor and becomes effective October 1, 2026. In practical terms, it expands the state’s criminal code to give courts and prosecutors a specific charge for violations of electronic monitoring conditions tied to pretrial release or other court-ordered supervision.

Impact

HB405 amends the Alabama Code by adding Section 13A-10-40.1, thereby creating a new misdemeanor offense related to noncompliance with electronic monitoring conditions. It affects individuals released from custody under electronic monitoring, as well as prosecutors, courts, and supervising authorities responsible for enforcing release conditions. The bill does not alter bail procedures generally, but it adds a separate criminal penalty for violations of monitoring requirements.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have broad support and little visible opposition. It passed the House and Senate unanimously, with recorded votes of 102-0 in the House and 30-0 in the Senate, indicating strong bipartisan agreement. The absence of committee transcripts or recorded debate suggests the measure was not especially controversial in the legislative process.

Contention

The main policy issue is whether violating electronic monitoring conditions should be treated as a separate criminal offense and, if so, how broadly that offense should apply. The bill addresses this by limiting the offense to people already lawfully released and subject to court-ordered electronic monitoring, while also recognizing a defense for unintentional or unavoidable violations. No specific lawmakers or stakeholder groups are identified in the available record as opposing the bill, and the unanimous votes suggest any concerns were minimal or resolved before final passage.