In prosecution on drug distribution charge, Dist. Ct. did not err in entering order that forfeited defendant’s bond that had been secured by home of defendant’s parents. Record showed that defendant violated bond condition, and that, although defendant appeared with counsel at bond revocation hearing, defendant left courtroom during recess and failed to appear with counsel when counsel re-entered courtroom to obtain clarification as to when defendant needed to surrender himself that day. Record further showed that defendant remained at large for at least two months after initial revocation hearing, when Dist. Ct. conducted second revocation hearing and entered instant bond forfeiture order. Ct. rejected sureties’ argument that forfeiture order was improper because bond was revoked at first forfeiture hearing prior to defendant’s flight, where court found that revocation of bond did not automatically terminate sureties’ liability on bond, and first revocation order merely set procedure for how defendant was to return to custody. Ct. also found that sureties had notice of all material changes in defendant’s release conditions.
