State v. KnightÂ, 255 N.C. App. 802

Defendant Antonio Knight failed to appear in Wilson County District Court; clerk issued a $2,000 bond forfeiture to Financial Casualty & Surety (Surety) and its bail agent.
Notice of forfeiture was mailed 17 March 2016; Surety’s bail agent filed a motion to set aside the forfeiture on the AOC form on 15 August 2016 (the day the forfeiture would otherwise become final).
The AOC form did not check any of the exclusive statutory grounds in N.C.G.S. § 15A-544.5; an attachment indicated Knight was incarcerated as of 2 August 2016.
The Board of Education opposed the motion. At a 3 October 2016 hearing the trial court found Surety had not shown any statutory ground under § 15A-544.5 and denied the motion.
Despite denying the motion, the trial judge orally directed the forfeiture be reduced from $2,000 to $300; the court’s written order contained a handwritten note “Surety to pay $300,” and Surety paid $300.
The Board of Education appealed, arguing the court lacked statutory authority to reduce the forfeiture amount after denying the § 15A-544.5 motion.

Issue	Board of Education’s Argument	Surety’s Argument	Held
Whether a trial court has authority under N.C.G.S. § 15A-544.5 to reduce a bond forfeiture amount after denying a motion to set aside	§ 15A-544.5 provides the exclusive, exhaustive relief before final judgment and does not permit partial reduction; the court lacked authority to lower the bond after denying the motion	The court, in its discretion, may reduce the forfeiture amount (characterizing the reduction as partial relief)	The court held § 15A-544.5 does not authorize a reduction; trial court lacked authority to reduce amount after denying the motion; order vacated and remanded
Whether the trial court’s action can be justified under other forfeiture-relief provisions (e.g., § 15A-544.8)	Relief under § 15A-544.8 applies only to final judgments of forfeiture, not pre-final § 15A-544.5 motions; thus not applicable	Relied on § 15A-544.8-like discretion to justify reduction	The court rejected invocation of § 15A-544.8 because the motion was pre-final and § 15A-544.5 is the controlling statute

State v. Dunn, 200 N.C. App. 606, 685 S.E.2d 526 (2009) (standard of review and status of Board as recipient of forfeiture proceeds)
State v. Rodrigo, 190 N.C. App. 661, 660 S.E.2d 615 (2008) (relief from forfeiture before final judgment limited to § 15A-544.5 grounds)
State v. Lazaro, 190 N.C. App. 670, 660 S.E.2d 618 (2008) (court erred setting aside forfeiture on a ground not listed in statute)
State v. Cortez, 215 N.C. App. 576, 715 S.E.2d 881 (2011) (courts may not create obligations outside the bond amount agreed by surety)
State v. Lopez, 169 N.C. App. 816, 611 S.E.2d 197 (2005) (discretionary relief and refund authority retained for relief from final forfeiture judgments)
State v. Gonzalez-Fernandez, 170 N.C. App. 45, 612 S.E.2d 148 (2005) (timing rules on when forfeiture becomes final and effect of pending motions)
State v. Hollars, 176 N.C. App. 571, 626 S.E.2d 850 (2006) (purpose of bail is to secure appearance and consequences of undermining sureties’ incentives)
State v. Coronel, 145 N.C. App. 237, 550 S.E.2d 561 (2001) (noting sureties’ duty to pursue defendants and that reductions may undermine that duty)