State v. Punio ( 2018 )

*** NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***
Electronically Filed
Supreme Court
SCWC-XX-XXXXXXX
15-NOV-2018
07:45 AM
SCWC-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
STATE OF HAWAI#I,
Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee,
vs.
JOSELYN CALIXTA PUNIO,
Respondent/Defendant-Appellee,
and
JAMES SCOTT WEI dba J & J BAIL BONDS,
Petitioner/Petitioner-Appellant, Real Party-in-Interest.
CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS
(CAAP-170000343; CR. NO. 15-1-0702)
SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)
Petitioner/Petitioner-Appellant James Scott Wei dba
J & J Bail Bonds (J & J Bail Bonds), real party-in-interest,
seeks review of the Intermediate Court of Appeals’ (ICA)
August 3, 2018 Judgment on Appeal, which affirmed the Circuit
Court of the First Circuit’s (circuit court) “Order Denying
*** NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***
Application of Surety Providing Good Cause as to Why Execution
Should Not Issue as to Judgment of Forfeiture.”
We vacate and remand. When Defendant Joselyn Calixta
Punio (Punio) made an oral motion to set aside the bail bond
forfeiture, the circuit court1 stated that “the bond company has
to file a motion to set aside the court’s prior action.” Our
bail bond forfeiture provision provides:
Whenever the court, in any criminal cause, forfeits
any bond or recognizance given in a criminal cause, the
court shall immediately enter up judgment in favor of the
State and against the principal or principals and surety or
sureties on the bond, jointly and severally, for the full
amount of the penalty thereof, and shall cause execution to
issue thereon immediately after the expiration of thirty
days from the date that notice is given via personal service
or certified mail, return receipt requested, to the surety
or sureties on the bond, of the entry of the judgment in
favor of the State, unless before the expiration of thirty
days from the date that notice is given to the surety or
sureties on the bond of the entry of the judgment in favor
of the State, a motion or application of the principal or
principals, surety or sureties, or any of them, showing good
cause why execution should not issue upon the judgment, is
filed with the court.
Hawai#i Revised Statutes (HRS) § 804-51 (2014) (emphasis added).
Under our bail bond statute, a “principal” includes a
defendant. See State v. Diaz, 128 Hawai#i 215, 223, 286 P.3d
824, 832 (2012); see also HRS § 804-41 (2014) (“At any time
before the breach of the condition of the bond, the surety may
discharge oneself by surrendering the principal into the hands of
any sheriff or the chief of police . . . .”). Therefore, under
1
The Honorable Colette Y. Garibaldi presided.
2
*** NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***
HRS § 804-51, a defendant may file a motion to set aside a bail
bond forfeiture.
In this case, although the circuit court did not abuse
its discretion in requiring a written motion to set aside the
bail bond forfeiture, the circuit court erred as a matter of law
when it did not consider the motion made by Punio (the defendant)
and instead required that a motion be filed by J & J Bail Bonds
(the surety).
Accordingly, we vacate the ICA’s August 3, 2018
Judgment on Appeal, vacate the circuit court’s January 17, 2017
Order Denying Application of Surety Providing Good Cause as to
Why Execution Should Not Issue as to Judgment of Forfeiture, and
remand this matter to the circuit court to consider Punio’s
November 3, 2015 motion to set aside the bail bond forfeiture.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, November 15, 2018.
William A. Harrison for /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
petitioner/petitioner-
appellant J & J Bail Bonds /s/ Paula A. Nakayama
Brian R. Vincent for /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
respondent/plaintiff-appellee
State of Hawai#i /s/ Richard W. Pollack
/s/ Michael D. Wilson
3