Posts

Showing posts with the label evidence

ICA orders new trial where prosecutor tells jury it’s blood without proving it’s blood; upholds denial of pretrial defense motions.

OVERRULED!   State v. Willis (ICA April 30, 2024) Background. Erik Willis was indicted for attempted murder in the second degree. This case goes back to 2020, when a 17-year-old girl was found on a Kahala Beach with stab wounds to her stomach. She survived. The police found surveillance footage showing that before she was found a “fair-skinned man, with dark curly hair, a blue disposable face mask, a clean white t-shirt, tan pants, and dark colored shoes with white striping on the side” was near the area. Footage from a bus showed the man getting on the bus and heading to the Kahala beach he got out off the bus approximately twenty minutes before the woman was found. More footage showed that at around the time the woman was found the man was running from the beach to a sink and appeared to “wash himself off.” At around 4 p.m., the man is seen with a soiled t-shirt sitting on the bus. HPD officer Matthew Motas watched the footage and identified the man as Willis.   ...

Judge accidentally strikes the entire expert opinion in a murder trial

  State v. Sylva (HSC December 29, 2023) Background. Kumulipo Sylva was indicted for murder in the second degree after he was arrested for killing Eduardo Cerezo in the bathroom of the Queen Kaahumanu Shopping Center. Sylva raised the insanity defense and three examiners were appointed to determine penal responsibility. All three concluded that Sylva suffered from a physical or mental disease, disorder, or defect. Two out of the three believed he lacked capacity under the insanity defense was not criminally responsible.   At trial, the prosecution presented evidence that Cerezo and Kyle Keoho got on the bus in Pukalani when they saw Sylva on the bus. Cerezo called Sylva a “pussy” and threatened to beat him up. When the bus got to the shopping center, the three of them got off and Sylva challenged Cerezo to a fight. Cerezo said he did not want to fight and Sylva walked away from them.   Cerezo and Keoho went to the bathroom together. Sylva also went into the bath...

Expert Testimony not Required for Decedent's BAC Level to Support Self-Defense Case

  State v. David (HSC September 9, 2021) Background. Peter David was initially charged with murder in the second degree. A jury found him guilty as charged, but the HSC vacated the conviction and remanded for new trial. Prior to trial, the prosecution moved in limine to exclude evidence from the toxicology report that the decedent’s blood alcohol content was 0.252. The circuit court, the Hon. Judge Paul Wong presiding, ruled that unless David had an expert to explain the connection between a BAC of 0.252 and intoxication, the evidence was inadmissible.   At trial the prosecution presented evidence that on New Year’s Day in Kalihi, David and his family were drinking heavily. David and his cousin, the decedent Santhony Albert, got into an argument. David asked for a beer and Albert punched him in the face and hit him with a beer bottle. The fight escalated to the point where they squared off in the parking lot in front of the housing. It ended when David stabbed Albert. ...

HRE Governs Motions in Limine about Evidence, No Explanation Required

  State v. Marroquin (HSC March 17, 2021) Background. Benito Marroquin III was charged with assault. He claimed self-defense and filed motions in limine seeking admission of statements made by eyewitnesses to the police. These statements were evidence that Marroquin punched the complainant because the complainant was choking him. Marroquin argued that the statement to the police was a statement of recent perception and, therefore, an exception to the hearsay rule pursuant to HRE Rule 804(b)(8). Marroquin also proffered in another motion in limine evidence from a defense investigator who interviewed another co-worker. This co-worker told the investigator that the complainant announced he “wasn’t going to take that from a punk like [Marroquin].” Marroquin also argued this statement was admissible pursuant to HRE Rule 804(b)(8). The circuit court, with the Hon. Judge Ronald Ibarra presiding, denied both motions. On the proffered evidence from the police officer, the circuit court s...

Judicial Notice of Math and Other "Generally Known Facts"

  State v. Kwong (HSC March 4, 2021) Background. Maggie Kwong was charged with operating a vehicle under the influence of an intoxicant. At her trial, Honolulu Police Department Officer Josh Wong testified that at around 3:30 a.m. he was traveling on Kapiolani Boulevard about 30 feet from the intersection with Isenberg street when Kwong abruptly cut him off by moving her vehicle from the right lane to the middle land and then into the far-left lane all without using her signal. According to Officer Wong, Kwong moved between his vehicle and a pick up truck that was turning left onto Isenberg Street. Officer Wong testified that he slammed on his breaks to avoid colliding into the back of Kwong’s vehicle and that “whatever was on my seat that wasn’t fastened, all the stuff went onto the floorboard.” He pulled Kwong over, got her out of the car, subjected her to field sobriety maneuvers, and determined that she failed those maneuvers.   On cross-examination, Officer Wong co...