In State v. Nunez, 173 Ariz. 524, 844 P.2d 1174 (App. 1992), the defendants had violated their release conditions by failing to appear, but the charges against them subsequently were dismissed with prejudice. 173 Ariz. at 525, 844 P.2d at 1175. A few weeks after the dismissal, the defendants moved to exonerate their bonds, and, after a contested hearing, the trial court ordered the bonds forfeited. Id. at 525-26, 844 P.2d at 1175-76. On appeal, the defendants argued the bonds should have been exonerated because the indictment had been dismissed before the forfeiture proceedings began. Id. at 526, 844 P.2d at 1176. The Court agreed, relying primarily upon Rules 7.6(e) and 16.5(e), Ariz. R. Crim. P., concluding that, because there was no further need for the appearance bonds after the charges had been dismissed, the defendants had been entitled to have them exonerated. Id.