Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Hawaii opinions name it 2 courts 1996–2026 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Hawaii courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Schroedergreen2 sentences2007The circuit court did not plainly err in its unanimity instruction. (6) The circuit court did not err by granting the State's Motion for Mandatory Term of Imprisonment, and the State did not fail "to provide sufficient notice to Gomez of its intent to rely on statutory aggravating factors to impose a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment under HRS § 706-660.1(3)(d)." Hawai`i case law supports our holding that the reference in the Complaint to use of a semiautomatic weapon in Count I (TT1) provided sufficient notice to Gomez that mandatory sentencing could later be sought. [4] Gomez mistakenly 1996In Schroeder , we held that “before a defendant may be sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment pursuant to HRS § 706-660.1, due process requires that he or she must ... be given reasonable notice of its intended application and afforded the opportunity to be heard.” Id. at 531, 880 P.2d at 206 . | 1 | 3 |
State v. Sanfordgreen2 sentences2026We therefore conclude that the circuit court's jury instructions were not prejudicially insufficient, erroneous, inconsistent, or misleading. (5) Damon contends that the circuit court committed plain error because its special interrogatory failed to instruct the jury on the "state of mind as to possession" required to impose a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment pursuant to HRS § 706-660.1. 7 "Because special interrogatories are another way in which trial courts instruct juries as to their deliberations and decisions, we review a trial court's special interrogatories, or the lack thereof, a 2026We therefore conclude that the circuit court's jury instructions were not prejudicially insufficient, erroneous, inconsistent, or misleading. (5) Damon contends that the circuit court committed plain error because its special interrogatory failed to instruct the jury on the "state of mind as to possession" required to impose a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment pursuant to HRS § 706-660.1. 7 "Because special interrogatories are another way in which trial courts instruct juries as to their deliberations and decisions, we review a trial court's special interrogatories, or the lack thereof, a | 1 | 1 |
State v. Smith. Concurring and Dissenting Opinion of McKenna, J. ICA s.d.o., filed 01/15/2025 [ada], 155 Haw. 257. Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 03/18/2025. S.Ct. Order Accepting Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 04/29/2025 [ada].green2 sentences2026In State v. Smith, the Hawaiʻi Supreme Court held that, "a sentencing enhancement under HRS § 706-660.1 is not an element of an underlying offense within the meaning of HRS § 702-205." 157 Hawaiʻi 1, 10, 575 P.3d 634, 643 (2025). 2026In State v. Smith, the Hawaiʻi Supreme Court held that, "a sentencing enhancement under HRS § 706-660.1 is not an element of an underlying offense within the meaning of HRS § 702-205." 157 Hawaiʻi 1, 10, 575 P.3d 634 , 643 (2025). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Coelhogreen2 sentences2005Convicting [the defendant] of being a felon in possession of a firearm pursuant to HRS § 134-7(b) and sentencing him to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment pursuant to HRS § 706-660.1(3)(c) essentially punished [the defendant] twice for a single possession of a firearm. 107 Hawai'i at 281 , 112 P.3d at 767 (emphasis added). 2005Convicting [the defendant] of being a felon in possession of a firearm pursuant to HRS § 134-7(b) and sentencing him to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment pursuant to HRS § 706-660.1(3)(c) essentially punished [the defendant] twice for a single possession of a firearm. 107 Hawai'i at 281 , 112 P.3d at 767 (emphasis added). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Hawaii. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Kang
green
2 sentences2007Those cases simply state that the charging document must be examined "in a common-sensical fashion in order to ascertain whether the material aggravating circumstance has been sufficiently alleged therein to support the imposition of enhanced sentencing." Kang, 84 Hawai`i at 356, 933 P.2d at 1390 (quoting Schroeder, 76 Hawai`i at 530, 880 P.2d at 205 ). 2007The circuit court did not plainly err in its unanimity instruction. (6) The circuit court did not err by granting the State's Motion for Mandatory Term of Imprisonment, and the State did not fail "to provide sufficient notice to Gomez of its intent to rely on statutory aggravating factors to impose a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment under HRS § 706-660.1(3)(d)." Hawai`i case law supports our holding that the reference in the Complaint to use of a semiautomatic weapon in Count I (TT1) provided sufficient notice to Gomez that mandatory sentencing could later be sought. [4] Gomez mistakenly | 1 | 2007–2007 |
State v. Vellina
green
1 sentence2005Id. at 449, 106 P.3d at 372 . | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.