Background
Shaka Bail LLC posted bonds of $6,000 and $5,000 to secure Ailao Tualaulelei’s appearances in two criminal cases. After Tualaulelei failed to appear on November 13, 2024, the Circuit Court of the First Circuit issued a bench warrant and entered forfeiture judgments. The surety insurer received notice by certified mail on November 25, 2024.
Tualaulelei was arrested on December 5, and the warrant return was filed the following day. Shaka moved to set aside the forfeiture judgments on December 28, 33 days after receipt of notice. The circuit court denied the motions as untimely, and Shaka appealed.
The Court’s Holding
The Intermediate Court of Appeals affirmed. Under HRS § 804-51, a surety seeking to prevent execution of a bail-forfeiture judgment must file a motion showing good cause before the 30-day period following notice expires. Because the thirtieth day fell on a holiday, Shaka’s deadline was December 26, 2024. Its December 28 filing was two days late, and the statute provided no further remedy once the deadline expired.
The court recognized that Tualaulelei’s return to custody during the 30-day period could have established good cause under State v. Camara had Shaka filed a timely motion. His arrest alone, however, did not excuse the filing requirement. The court also held that Shaka waived its service and constitutional arguments by failing to raise them in the circuit court. The Hawaiʻi Rules of Civil Procedure generally do not apply to bond-forfeiture proceedings, and Shaka had not asked the circuit court to invoke HRCP Rule 81(h).
Key Takeaways
- A motion to set aside a bail-forfeiture judgment under HRS § 804-51 must be filed within 30 days after the surety receives notice.
- A defendant’s return to custody during that period may establish good cause, but it does not eliminate the requirement to file a timely motion.
- Service, constitutional, and discretionary application-of-civil-rules arguments may be waived if they are not presented to the circuit court.
Why It Matters
The decision treats HRS § 804-51’s 30-day period as a firm limit on the circuit court’s power to grant relief from a bail-forfeiture judgment. Even when the State regains custody of the defendant before the deadline, a surety must timely request relief rather than rely on the defendant’s arrest alone.
For bail sureties and counsel, the opinion underscores the need to calculate the statutory deadline from receipt of notice and file promptly once facts supporting good cause arise.