Rule 48’s Six-Month Clock Starts when Prosecution Files Citation
State v. Man (ICA July 19, 2020)
Background. Robert Man
was cited by the police for the offense of accidents involving damage to
vehicle or property (HRS § 291C-13) and no motor vehicle insurance (HRS §
431:10C-104) on June 2, 2018. On June 7, 2018, the prosecution filed the
citation in the District Court with the Hon. Judge Summer Kupau-Odo presiding
thereby initiating the proceedings. Man did not appear at the arraignment and
the prosecution continued the case twice before it was dismissed without
prejudice.
On May 6, 2019, almost a year later, the prosecution filed a
complaint averring drunk driving and accidents involving damage to vehicle or
property. Man was served with a copy. Man eventually filed a motion to dismiss
based on a violation of Hawai'i Rules of Penal Procedure Rule 48 on the grounds
that the six-month clock started at the filing of the citation. The District
Court granted the motion and dismissed the case with prejudice the prosecution
appealed.
HRPP Rule 48 Triggered at the Filing of the
Citation, not the Complaint. Rule 48 is designed “not only to
ensure speedy trial for criminal defendants, . . . but also to relieve
congestion in the trial court, to promptly process all cases reaching the
courts[,] and to advance the efficiency of the criminal justice process.” State
v. Choy Foo, 142 Hawai'i 65, 72, 414 P.3d 117, 124 (2018). HRPP Rule 48
requires dismissal of the charge “if trial is not commenced within six months”
from “the filing of the charge.” HRPP Rule 48(b)(1).
The ICA rejected the prosecution’s argument that that the
filing of the citation did not start the clock. Rules of statutory construction
apply to court rules. State v. Carlton, 146 Hawai'i 16, 22, 455 P.3d
356, 362 (2019). The ICA started with the plain language of the words “the
filing of the charge.” To “file” means “the submission of a written document.” State
v. Visintin, 143 Hawai'i 143, 152, 426 P.3d 367, 376 (2018). The “charge”
is a “formal accusation of an offense as a preliminary step to prosecution.” Black’s
Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019). And so the ICA held that the words “filing
of the charge” means “the submission to the court clerk of a written document
containing a formal accusation of an offense as a preliminary step to
prosecution.” The ICA ultimately held that the filing of the citation on June
7, 2018 constituted “the filing of the charge” for purposes of HRPP Rule 48.
Dismissal with Prejudice was not an Abuse of
Discretion. Upon finding a violation of HRPP Rule 48, the
trial court has discretion to dismiss with or without prejudice. HRPP Rule
48(b). Dismissal with or without prejudice requires balancing of the following
factors: (1) the seriousness of the offense; (2) the facts and circumstances of
the case which led to dismissal; and (3) “the impact of a reprosecution on the administration
of [HRPP Rule 48] and on the administration of justice.” State v. Fukuoka,
141 Hawai'i 48, 55-56, 404 P.3d 314, 321 (2017). Prejudice to the defendant may
also be considered. Id. at 56, 404 P.3d at 321. Here, the district court
weighed all three factors—the first went to the prosecution, but the other two
weighed toward the defendant—and found no abuse of discretion.
Comments