Posts

Showing posts with the label stare decisis

Defective Complaint is Not a Jurisdictional Defect

State v. Kam (ICA November 26, 2014) Background. Cierra Ann Kam was charged as a repeat offender of operating a vehicle while under the influence of an intoxicant and operating a vehicle after her license to drive was suspended or revoked for OUI. The complaint failed to allege the required mens rea for each count. After the complaint was filed, the HSC handed down State v. Nesmith , 127 Hawaii 48, 276 P.3d 617 (2012). The HSC held that the portion of the complaint alleging OUI by way of facts (HRS § 291E-61(a)(1)) required the “intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly” mens rea . Id. at 54, 56, 61, 276 P.3d at 623, 625, 630. In the wake of Nesmith , the prosecution moved to amend the complaint. Kam opposed on the grounds that the defect in charging the complaint was a jurisdictional one that required dismissal of the case all together. The district court granted the motion and the amended complaint was served on Kam. Kam acknowledged receipt and pleaded not guilty. Kam wa...

How to Dismiss With (or Without) Prejudice

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...

Native Hawaiian Rights--Once Proven--still must be Weighed Against State Interest

State v. Pratt (ICA November 18, 2010) OVERRULED! Background. The State charged Lloyd Pratt with three violations of camping in a closed area within the Kalalau State Park . HAR § 13-146-04(a). Pratt filed a motion to dismiss the prosecution on the grounds that he was a Native Hawaiian engaged in a constitutionally-protected traditional and cultural practice. Pratt argued that he was a kahu or religious practitioner who was a caretaker of the land and, as part of his traditional practices, goes into the Kalalau Valley to tend to the heiau there and perform cultural ceremonies. At the hearing on the motion, Pratt presented evidence that he was 75% Hawaiian through genealogical records. He did not have any genealogical records establishing that his ancestors came from Kalalau Valley. Pratt also presented evidence that he was a kahu, a religious practitioner whose duties include cleaning and repairing ancient heiau. Other duties include planting trees and clearing debris. ...

Sentencing Court has to Explain why it gave Consecutive Terms

State v. Hussein (HSC April 21, 2010) Background. Hussein pleaded guilty to 39 offenses. This included 8 counts of identity theft in the 2d degree, class B felonies, 4 counts of identity theft in the 3d degree (class Cs), 15 counts of forgery in the 2d degree (class Cs), 1 count of fraudulent use of credit card (a class C), and 7 counts of theft in the 2d degree (class C). Hussein was already serving a ten-year sentence (one ten-year term and two five-year terms concurrently). The State moved for the instance offenses to run consecutively with the one she was already serving. The circuit court granted the motion. Hussein appealed on the grounds that the sentence was unlawful and that her counsel was ineffective for not presenting mitigating factors at sentencing and for failing to file a motion to reduce the sentence. The ICA affirmed. No "Clear Evidence" that the Sentencing Court Failed to Consider General Sentencing Factors. The sentencing court has wid...

HSC Reels in ICA over Inherent Court Powers.

State v. Hinton (HSC March 20, 2009) Background.   Hinton was first indicted for allegedly touching a girl (sex assault in the 3d. -- HRS § 707-7321(1)(b)).   As the jury deliberated, the jurors informed the trial court that they could not reach a unanimous verdict.   The jury was hopelessly deadlocked and the trial court declared a mistrial.   Hinton moved for a dismissal pursuant to State v. Moriwake , 65 Haw. 47, 647 P.2d 705 (1982).   The trial court granted the motion and the State appealed. The ICA reversed the trial court's dismissal.   Relying on cases from different jurisdictions, the ICA concluded that separation of powers concerns require that a Moriwake dismissal be used sparingly.   The ICA   held that the trial court abused its discretion in granting the Moriwake motion.   Judge Foley dissented.   Hinton appealed. Moriwake and the Inherent Power to Dismiss.   The trial court's inherent power "to protect itself; the power to administer justice wheth...