Hawai'i Legal News

State v. Glenn (HSC June 30, 2020) Background. Michael Glenn was charged with terroristic threatening in the first degree. Glenn filed a motion to determine fitness to proceed and penal responsibility. The motion was granted and three examiners were appointed to determine his mental capacity and opine on whether he had penal responsibility at the time of the offense. Two of the three examiners found that he was unfit to proceed and that he lacked penal responsibility. Dr. Marvin Acklin, Ph.D. disagreed. He determined that Glenn “appeared” fit and that he was not mentally ill at the time of the offense. At the first hearing, the parties stipulated to the findings in all three reports. Counsel did state on the record that Glenn did not agree with the majority findings that he was unfit to proceed. The circuit court with the Hon. Judge Richard Perkins presiding committed Glenn to the Director of the Department of Health for detention, care, and treatment. Glenn was placed at the Hawai...

State v. Chang (HSC June 28, 2019) Background. David Yen Hoy Chang was charged with driving while under the influence of an intoxicant. He pleaded not guilty and appeared in the district court. There, the district court was informed that the hearing on the motion to suppress would be consolidated with a bench trial. The district court began with the motion to suppress. Honolulu Police Department Officer Jared Spiker testified that he pulled Chang over for driving at little after one in the morning without his headlights on and make an unlawful left turn. When he talked to Chang he noticed the odor of alcohol on his breath and saw that his eyes were red, watery, and glassy. His face was flushed; speech slurred. Officer Spiker asked for Chang’s driver’s license, registration, and insurance, which were produced without difficulty or delay. Officer Spiker informed Chang he was pulled over for driving infractions and invited him to participate in standardized field sobriety tests. ...

State v. Torres (HSC April 10, 2019) Background. Rinaldo Torres was indicted with robbery in the first degree and terroristic threatening in the first degree. Five days before trial, Torres submitted a form titled “Waiver of Indictment/Trial by Jury.” The form was signed by Torres and indicated a desire to waive his right to a jury trial and consent to a trial by the court without a jury. Prior to trial, the circuit court announced that Torres indicated that he wished to waive his right to a jury trial. The circuit court questioned Torres in open court about this waiver. The judge asked if Torres signed the waiver form. Torres said he did. He asked if he went over the form with his lawyer. Yes, said Torres. He also asked if he understood the form. “I believe I did. Yeah.” The judge questioned Torres if he understood his right to a jury trial, the right to select a jury, the right to a unanimous verdict, and the right to question potential jurors. Torres said he understood. He ...

State v. Celestine (HSC April 12, 2018) Background. Ritalynn Celestine was charged with operating a vehicle while under influence of an intoxicant. Before the start of evidence at trial, the district court addressed Celestine: Okay. Miss Celestine, to advise you of your right at trial, at some point in time the State will rest, okay, and you’ll have an opportunity to testify or remain silent. Should you choose to remain silent, the Court can infer no guilty because of your silence. Basically, you’ll be invoking your Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Okay, you understand? THE DEFENDANT: Yes, sir. THE COURT: However, if you do wish to testify, you need to be sworn in, you’re also subject to cross-examination by the State’s attorney. Okay?           Okay. And when the State does rest, okay, I’ll remind you again, okay, I have to finish this even though we’re doing this . . . piecemeal today. All right. An...

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. Castillon (ICA May 31, 2017) OVERRULED IN PART. READ IT HERE. Background. Michelle Helen Castillon was charged with driving without a license in violation of HRS § 286-102. At trial, the prosecution proved that Castillon did not have a valid Hawaii driver’s license on the day she was seen driving a car on a public road. There was no evidence that Castillon had been issued a valid driver’s license from Canada or Mexico. The district court convicted her and she appealed. DWOL and its Exceptions. “No person . . . shall operate any category of motor vehicles . . . without first being appropriately examined and duly licensed as a qualified driver of that category of motor vehicles.” HRS § 286-102(a). There are exceptions for any person possessing a license “that is equivalent to a driver’s license issued in this State but was issued to the person in another state of the United States, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, United States Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam, ...