Posts

Showing posts from March, 2023

HSC “clarifies” forty-year-old test to determine whether offenses arise from one episode

  State v. Sardinha (HSC March 9, 2023) Background. Bronson Sardinha’s appeal involves two cases. On November 28, 2015, Honolulu Police Department Officer Crystal Roe arrived at the intersection of Farrington Highway and Waipio Point Access Road in Waipahu. There was a traffic accident involving a damaged vehicle. The other vehicle that caused the accident fled the scene. Later, police tracked down Sardinha and cited him for multiple traffic offenses. He was charged with those traffic offenses in district court and pleaded no contest to inattention to driving. The district court convicted and sentenced him on March 16, 2016.   The other case involves assault. On the same night of the traffic citations, officers were called to Nancy’s Kitchen at the Waipio Shopping Center because a man and woman were arguing. When they got there, they separated the man, who turned out to be Sardinha, and the woman. Sardinha was outside and acted aggressively toward the officers. One of the office

Apprendi applied to enhanced sentencing in 2003, but so did the prior-convictions exception

  State v. Perry (HSC March 8, 2023) Background. In 2002, Jason Perry was indicted with two counts of murder in the second degree. HRS § 707-701.5 (1993). At his trial in 2003, a co-defendant testified against him. Perry took the stand and testified too. Their testimony centered around count 2 and the shooting of the possible witness to the killing of the decedent in count 1. The co-defendant testified that Perry shot the witness. Perry said it was the co-defendant.   The jury returned a guilty verdict for count 1 and answered a special interrogatory establishing that Perry was both a principal and accomplice in the murder. In count 2, the jury found Perry guilty as an accomplice only. The circuit court—with the Hon. Judge Karen S. Ahn presiding—gave another special interrogatory about whether the prosecution proved that Perry was carrying or using a semi-automatic weapon at the time of the killing in count 2. The jury answered that he had. This fact is needed to impose a mandat

Violations aren't "crimes" so defendants convicted to amended violations can get their arrest records expunged

  Barker v. Young (HSC March 6, 2023) Background. Phillip Barker was arrested under suspicion of harassment, a petty misdemeanor. He ultimately pleaded no contest to the amended charge of disorderly conduct, a violation. Approximately two years after the arrest, he applied to the Hawai'i Criminal Justice Data Center (HCJDC) to have his arrest records expunged. The application was denied.   Barker filed a civil complaint against the HCJDC asking the circuit court to order the HCJDC to accept his application because he was eligible for an expungement. Both Barker and the HCJDC filed motions for summary judgment. The circuit court—with the Hon. Bert I. Ayabe presiding—ruled for the HCJDC and granted its motion for summary judgment. Barker appealed. The ICA in a published opinion written by the Hon. Judge Karen T. Nakasone affirmed. The circuit court and the ICA relied on legislative history and concluded that the expungement statute did not cover violations because a violation

Appeal from dismissal of the first case does not divest trial court’s jurisdiction over the later-filed second case.

  State v. Michaeledes (HSC March 3, 2023) Background. The prosecution charged in a felony information and non-felony complaint David Michaeledes with three counts of reckless driving, assault in the 2d degree, and accidents involving substantial bodily injury. Michaeledes moved to dismiss the charging document on the grounds that its language was fatally flawed. The prosecution moved to amend the charging document. The circuit court, with the Honorable Randal G. B. Valenciano presiding, denied the prosecution’s motion to amend, granted Michaeledes’ motion to dismiss, and dismissed the case without prejudice. The prosecution filed a notice of appeal thereby appealing from the order dismissing the case and the order denying its motion to amend.   While the case was on appeal, the prosecution filed a second charging document—this time with the correct language—alleging the same counts. Michaeledes moved to dismiss this case on the grounds that the circuit court did not have jurisd