State v. Durfey

Summary

The Oklahoma Supreme Court held that a bondsman was entitled to remittance of a $100,000 forfeited bond because the sheriff failed to honor the bondsman's written request to enter the defendant into the NCIC database without geographic restrictions within the statutory period. The Court concluded that the bond was exonerated by operation of law under 59 O.S. Supp. 2014 § 1332 and that the bondsman had shown good cause for the defendant's nonappearance. The Court vacated the Court of Civil Appeals opinion, reversed the trial court, and remanded for further proceedings.

Holdings

1. A bondsman who makes the written request required by 59 O.S. Supp. 2014 § 1332(C)(5)(a), without a territorial limitation, is entitled to exoneration by operation of law when the sheriff fails to honor the request within fourteen business days.
2. The expiration of the ninety-day grace period and payment of the bond forfeiture do not terminate the operation of § 1332(C) or eliminate the court's authority to grant relief under that subsection.
3. Burks demonstrated good cause under § 1332(C)(6)(a) for the defendant's failure to appear and was entitled to vacation of the forfeiture and exoneration of the bond.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a bondsman is entitled to exoneration by operation of law under 59 O.S. Supp. 2014 § 1332(C)(5)(a) when the sheriff fails to honor a written request for an unrestricted NCIC entry within fourteen business days.
2. Whether the ninety-day period for returning a defendant and the bondsman's payment of the forfeiture eliminate the trial court's authority under § 1332(C) to vacate the forfeiture and exonerate the bond.
3. Whether the bondsman demonstrated good cause under § 1332(C)(6)(a) for the defendant's failure to appear and the bondsman's inability to return him to custody.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded