Hawai'i Legal News

  State v. Hirata (HSC October 31, 2022) Background. Chanse Hirata was charged with continuous sexual assault of a minor under the age of 14. HRS § 707-733.6. At trial, the prosecutor, Honolulu DPA Kristen Yamamoto, told the jury in her opening statement that there was no DNA evidence, no surveillance videos, and no eyewitnesses “But you will hear from the one person that lived through all of this[,]” the complaining witness.   The complaining witness, her parents, two police officers, a doctor who examined the complaining witness, and an expert in the “dynamics of child sexual abuse” testified for the prosecution. The defense called Hirata, his parents, and his girlfriend.   The trial court, with the Hon. Judge Catherine Remigio presiding, instructed the jury on credibility with Hawai'i Standard Jury Instructions Criminal (HAWJIC) 3.09:   It is your exclusive right to determine and to what extent a witness should be believed and to give weight to his ...

  In re: JK (ICA June 10, 2021) Background. JK was examined at the emergency room by Dr. Michael McGrath in Kona. JK’s family reported that he had been acting bizarre, not sleeping, and was possibly dangerous. Dr. McGrath developed a working diagnosis that JK had manic bipolar disorder and certified him for involuntary hospitalization. The State’s Department of Health petitioned the family court with the Hon. Judge Aley Auna, Jr. presiding for involuntary commitment. A hearing was held to determine the issue.   Dr. McGrath and JK’s spouse testified. The family court also questioned Dr. McGrath and JK’s spouse after the parties and allowed further questioning. The family court found sufficient evidence to keep JK in the hospital against his will by finding him mentally ill and imminently dangerous to himself and others. JK appealed.   The Mootness Doctrine. The State argued that the issues in this appeal were moot because JK has already been released from the h...

State v. Eduwensuyi (HSC January 18, 2018) Background. Benjamin Eduwensuyi was charged with operating under the influence of an intoxicant. He had a bench trial. At trial, before the presentation of evidence, the district court advised Eduwensuyi about testifying. The judge told him that he had “to advise you that you have a right to testify if you choose to do so.” Eduwensuyi said, “yes, your honor.” Then the judge said this: And you also have a right not to testify. That’s up to you. I’ll question you further toward the end of the trial as to whether or not you want to waive either of these rights, to make sure that you’ve been fully informed of your rights and to make sure that any decision you make is your decision, it’s voluntary, okay. So your attorney can give you advice about whether or not you should or should not testify, but ultimately, it’s your decision. Do you understand that? Eduwensuyi said, “yes.” Then the prosecution presented evidence. The prosecution ca...

State v. Hern & State v. Ledbetter (ICA March 27, 2013) Background. In January, Dennis Hern was charged with driving under the influence of an intoxicant. Hern filed a series of pretrial motions including a motion to compel discovery and a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. At a hearing, the motion to compel was granted and the motion to dismiss was denied. In August, Hern filed a motion to dismiss for violation of speedy trial rights and a violation of HRPP Rule 48. The district court found a rule 48 violation and dismissed the case without prejudice. Hern moved to reconsider the dismissal without prejudice. Joseph Ledbetter was also charged with DUI. Ledbetter filed four motions to compel discovery. At a hearing before the district court, the prosecution said it was ready for trial. Ledbetter said he had not received discovery. The trial was continue with time charged against the prosecution. At a hearing nearly two months later, the prosecution served Ledbette...

In re Attorney's Fees of David Bettencourt (HSC October 19, 2011) Background. The circuit court appointed David Bettencourt to represent Joshua Gonda in a murder case. The case went to trial and Gonda was found not guilty on all counts. Bettencourt represented Gonda for 16 months. In the middle of the case, Bettencourt requested attorney's fees of $19,188 for 213.2 billable hours at $90.00 per hour. The trial court judge certified the entire amount. The administrative judge, however, struck out billable time submitted for making copies of documents on the grounds that it was not legal work. The administrative judge approved of $18,567. After trial, Bettencourt made his second request. This time he requested $38,529 in fees for 428.1 hours of work. The trial judge approved it. Again, however, the administrative judge cut out almost $11,000 in fees and awarded $26,640. The administrative judge did not provide any specific grounds for the cut. Attached...

State v. Cooley (ICA June 30, 2010) Background. The State charged Cooley with possession of an alcoholic beverage at Waialae Beach Park, a public area. Revised Ordinances of Honolulu § 40-1.2. The offense is a petty misdemeanor. ROH § 40-1.3. At his arraignment, the State moved to amend the charge to the consumption of an intoxicating liquor at a scenic look out, which is a violation. HRS § 291-3.3. The district court granted the motion and ordered Cooley to pay $27.00 in fees and fines. The violation appeared on Cooley's traffic record. Cooley filed a motion to correct the abstract of traffic record on the grounds that HRS § 291-3.3 was not a "moving violation." The district court denied the motion and concluded that Cooley "waived any defense that the consumption of the intoxicating liquor at the scenic lookout had to have arisen from the operation of a motor vehicle." Cooley filed a motion for reconsideration and requested a hearing. That too ...

State v. Mark (HSC May 12, 2010) Background. Mark, with others present, met with Paikai and Piko in a parking lot. There was a dispute over a camera. Paikai had a box which supposedly had the camera. At that point, Mark produced a gun and fired shots above Piko's head. Mark also fired a shot at Paikai and hit her in the leg. Mark later testified that he intended on shooting her in the leg and did not aim for her head or body. About a month later, two plain-clothes officers responded to a tip that Mark was at a Baskin Robbins in Kapolei. Officers Gaspar and Sung were going to arrest Mark pursuant to a warrant. When they got there, Mark was there with his girlfriend and his daughter; he struggled with the officers and Mark fired three shots. Officer Gaspar died from the gunshot wounds. Two indictments came down against Mark. They were consolidated for trial. Mark raised self-defense and defense of others in both cases. A defense-of-others instruction wa...