fair evidentiary hearing in Hawaii

2026The court may also deny a hearing on a specific question of fact when a full and fair evidentiary hearing upon that question was held during the course of the proceedings which led to the judgment or custody which is the subject of the petition or at any later proceeding. 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER "Under article I, section 14 of the Hawai i Constitution and the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution, defendants in criminal cases are provided with the right to the effective assistance of counsel at trial." State v. Salavea, 147 Hawai i 564,

2026The court may also deny a hearing on a specific question of fact when a full and fair evidentiary hearing upon that question was held during the course of the proceedings which led to the judgment or custody which is the subject of the petition or at any later proceeding. 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER "Under article I, section 14 of the Hawai i Constitution and the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution, defendants in criminal cases are provided with the right to the effective assistance of counsel at trial." State v. Salavea, 147 Hawai i 564,

2026Hawai i courts determine whether the assistance, when viewed as a whole, was within the "range of competence demanded of attorneys in criminal cases[.]" State v. Richie, 88 Hawai i 19, 39, 960 P.2d 1227, 1247 (1998).

2026Hawai i courts determine whether the assistance, when viewed as a whole, was within the "range of competence demanded of attorneys in criminal cases[.]" State v. Richie, 88 Hawai i 19, 39, 960 P.2d 1227, 1247 (1998).

2025A circuit court errs in denying a Rule 40 petition without a hearing when it fails to make the "necessary finding that the petitioner's claim was patently frivolous and without a trace of support in the record or in other evidence submitted by the petitioner." See, e.g., Cacatian v. State, 70 Haw. 402, 404 , 772 P.2d 691, 692 (1989); accord Domingo v. State, 76 Hawai#i 237, 243, 873 P.2d 775, 781 (1994).

2025A circuit court errs in denying a Rule 40 petition without a hearing when it fails to make the "necessary finding that the petitioner's claim was patently frivolous and without a trace of support in the record or in other evidence submitted by the petitioner." See, e.g., Cacatian v. State, 70 Haw. 402, 404 , 772 P.2d 691, 692 (1989); accord Domingo v. State, 76 Hawai#i 237, 243, 873 P.2d 775, 781 (1994).

2025A circuit court errs in denying a Rule 40 petition without a hearing when it fails to make the "necessary finding that the petitioner's claim was patently frivolous and without a trace of support in the record or in other evidence submitted by the petitioner." See, e.g., Cacatian v. State, 70 Haw. 402, 404 , 772 P.2d 691, 692 (1989); accord Domingo v. State, 76 Hawai#i 237, 243, 873 P.2d 775, 781 (1994).

2022Cnty. of Kauai, 104 Hawai#i 173, 180-81, 86 P.3d 982 , 989-90 (2004) (quoting O'Connor v. Diocese of Honolulu, 77 Hawai #i 383, 386, 885 P.2d 361, 364 (1994)). 5/ The March 6, 2020 hearing, which the Circuit Court characterized as erroneously given, was not "a full and fair evidentiary hearing" as set forth in HRPP Rule 40(f). 5 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAII REPORTS OR THE PACIFIC REPORTER Where examination of the record of the trial court proceedings indicates that the petitioner's allegations show no colorable claim, it is not error to deny the petition without a hearing.

2009(Emphases added.) In Dan v. State, 76 Hawai`i 423, 427, 879 P.2d 528, 532 (1994), the Hawai`i Supreme Court held that the issue of whether a trial court erred in denying a Rule 40 petition without a hearing based on a showing of no colorable claim is reviewed on appeal de novo; thus, the right/wrong standard of review is applicable.

2007Hutch, 107 Hawai'i at 414 , 114 P.3d at 920 (holding that “a hearing on a Rule 40 petition is required whenever the *123 allegations in a petition, if taken as true, (1) would change the verdict rendered or (2) would establish the illegality of custody following a judgment[]” (citing HRPP Rules 40(a) and (f)); Turner, 93 Hawai'i at 310, 1 P.3d at 780))); see also HRPP Rule 40(f) (“The petitioner shall have a full and fair evidentiary hearing on the petition.

2007Hutch, 107 Hawai'i at 414 , 114 P.3d at 920 (holding that “a hearing on a Rule 40 petition is required whenever the *123 allegations in a petition, if taken as true, (1) would change the verdict rendered or (2) would establish the illegality of custody following a judgment[]” (citing HRPP Rules 40(a) and (f)); Turner, 93 Hawai'i at 310, 1 P.3d at 780))); see also HRPP Rule 40(f) (“The petitioner shall have a full and fair evidentiary hearing on the petition.

1987A rule providing for post-conviction relief requires “proceedings to determine the facts underlying a defendant’s claim for relief when such facts are not otherwise available.” State v. Schrock, 149 Ariz. 433, 441 , 719 P.2d 1049, 1057 (1986) (quoting State v. Bell, 23 Ariz. App. 169, 171 , 531 P.2d 545, 547 (1975)).

1987A rule providing for post-conviction relief requires “proceedings to determine the facts underlying a defendant’s claim for relief when such facts are not otherwise available.” State v. Schrock, 149 Ariz. 433, 441 , 719 P.2d 1049, 1057 (1986) (quoting State v. Bell, 23 Ariz. App. 169, 171 , 531 P.2d 545, 547 (1975)).

1987A rule providing for post-conviction relief requires “proceedings to determine the facts underlying a defendant’s claim for relief when such facts are not otherwise available.” State v. Schrock, 149 Ariz. 433, 441 , 719 P.2d 1049, 1057 (1986) (quoting State v. Bell, 23 Ariz. App. 169, 171 , 531 P.2d 545, 547 (1975)).

1987A rule providing for post-conviction relief requires “proceedings to determine the facts underlying a defendant’s claim for relief when such facts are not otherwise available.” State v. Schrock, 149 Ariz. 433, 441 , 719 P.2d 1049, 1057 (1986) (quoting State v. Bell, 23 Ariz. App. 169, 171 , 531 P.2d 545, 547 (1975)).