Posts

Showing posts with the label defenses

Self-defense and the emphasis on the defendant’s subjective belief that deadly force is necessary

  In re: DM (HSC March 15, 2023) Background. The prosecution charged a minor, DM, with attempted assault in the first degree. The family court held a bench trial. The facts are largely undisputed. A group of teenagers got together one night at Hau Bush in Ewa Beach. It was dark and illuminated primarily by open car and truck doors. Most of the kids were drinking. DM and his cousin went to the party and met some girls there. As DM was talking, the complainant intervened. He was shirtless and looked sketchy. DM told him to leave. He did, but soon came back and harassed a girl talking with DM. DM stood up for her and the complainant challenged DM to fight. DM said he did not want to cause trouble and asked him to leave. He would not, and asked where he was from. When DM said he was from Kalihi, they started arguing.   It got physical when the complainant rushed at DM and punched him several times. DM fought back. The complainant’s friends and others jumped in to pull them ...

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. ...

ICA Upholds Native Hawaiian Protestor's Conviction for Stopping Construction at Haleakala (OVERRULED)

  State v. Kaeo (ICA June 29, 2021) Overruled by HSC Here. Background. Samuel K. Kaeo was charged with disorderly conduct. HRS § 711-1101(1)(d). The prosecution presented evidence at the bench trial of a convoy of vehicles scheduled to transport materials from the Central Maui Baseyard to the Daniel K. Inouye Solar Telescope at the summit of Haleakala. The convoy was scheduled to leave at 10:00 p.m. The project manager of the telescope construction site testified that at around 7 p.m., Kaeo was at the baseyard and approached him. He told the manager to get ready because they “were in for the night.” By 8:30 p.m., the Maui Police Department set up lights on the roadway nearby and a group of over 100 protestors were outside holding signs and walking around the crosswalk outside the gate. At around 9:30 p.m. and later at 10, the convoy tried to get out of the baseyard, but the protesters blocked the way. The convoy consisted of approximately twenty people, four vehicles, three truc...

Insanity Defense Includes Meth Psychosis and Other Permanent Disorders Caused by Drug Abuse

  State v. Abion (HSC December 29, 2020) Background. Ramoncito Abion was charged with assault in the 2d degree. Prior to trial, Abion moved for an examination to determine his fitness to stand trial and his penal responsibility. One of the examiners, Dr. Martin Blinder , concluded that at the time of the assault, Mr. Abion was suffering from a disorder that precluded penal responsibility. Dr. Blinder believed that the disorder was caused by prolonged methamphetamine use. The prosecution moved to preclude Dr. Blinder from testifying at trial on the grounds that his testimony was irrelevant.   The prosecution argued that self-induced intoxication is excluded from the lack-of-penal-responsibility defense and that Dr. Blinder’s testimony would be irrelevant. At the hearing, Dr. Blinder expanded on his opinion. He diagnosed Abion with methamphetamine psychosis. Dr. Blinder explained that methamphetamine can cause “structural changes in the brain” that will render someone “pe...

The Constitutional Dimension of the Insanity Defense Requires Colloquy and Waiver of Defense Before Trial

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...

The Right to Present a Complete Defense Requires Telling it in your own Words

State v. Williams (HSC June 15, 2020) Background. Joshua Williams was charged with the attempted murder of David Quindt, Jr. Before trial, Williams filed notice pursuant to HRE Rule 404(b) of prior bad acts. Williams intended to present evidence that Quindt told him about his violent past in an effort to explain why Williams feared for his life. Quindt would boast about doing time for murder in California, doing “hard time,” that he knows how to fight because of the time he spent in jail, he knows “gang-bangers” and gang members, he has experience with violence due to being in jail, he “got away with murder” by beating the charge, and that he did the crime, but still “got off on a technicality.” The prosecution opposed the evidence in a motion in limine. The circuit court presided by the Hon. Judge Karen Ahn, granted the motion in part and allowed Williams to testify about Quindt’s murder conviction and how he had to learn to fight to survive in jail. The circuit court ordered Willi...

Removing Life Support Might be an Intervening Cause to Murder, but not a Defense

State v. Abella (HSC December 17, 2019) Background. Michael Abella was indicted for murder in the second degree. At trial the prosecution presented evidence that on a night in July 2014, at the corner of Smith and Pauahi Streets in Chinatown Abella stood over Shelton Higa and was violently kicking and punching him. A group of people intervened and stopped him. Abella left the area. The police soon intervened. Higa was conscious and filled out some paperwork. The police testified that they could smell the odor of alcohol on Higa’s breath. The medics also arrived and checked him out. He appeared stable and refused a ride in the ambulance to the hospital. About an hour later the ambulance returned to the scene. Higa was rolling around on the ground screaming and yelling. He was transported to Queen’s, where he was combative, agitated, and had “significantly high” blood pressure. He fell unconscious and remained in a coma. Treating physicians testified and concluded that Higa had suffe...

Counsel can Urge Jury to Walk in Defendant’s Shoes (for Purposes of Choice-of-Evils Defense)

State v. Kauhane (HSC November 12, 2019) Background. Fifteen to twenty protestors objected to the construction of a large telescope at the summit of Haleakala on Maui by standing shoulder to shoulder on the roadway in 2015. The protestors were blocking the roadway to prevent a convoy of construction vehicles and equipment heading to the summit. When the initial group of protestors were cleared, seven sat in the middle of the roadway chanting and praying. Keith Kauhane was among the Haleakala seven arrested. Kauhane was served a criminal complaint alleging the offense of Obstructing in violation of HRS § 711-1105(1)(a). Here’s the language of the charge: That on or about the 20 th day of August, 2015, in the County of Maui, State of Hawaii, KEITH KAUHANE, whether alone or with others and having no legal privilege to do so, did knowingly or recklessly persist to obstruct any highway or public passage, after a warning by a law enforcement officer to move to prevent or to ceas...