course analysis in Hawaii

2022We acknowledged that “we look to the totality of the circumstances,” id. at 122, 34 P.3d at 1021 (quoting Ah Loo, 94 Hawaiʻi at 210, 10 P.3d at 731 ), that “there is no simple or precise bright line delineating when ‘the point of arrest’ has arrived,” and that “no single factor, in itself, is dispositive as to when a temporary investigative detention has morphed into an arrest,” id. at 125, 34 P.3d at 1024 .

2022During the course of our analysis, we reviewed our precedent, including Ah Loo, which we characterized as holding that a detainee is in custody when they are “expressly or impliedly accused of having committed a crime.” Id. at 124, 34 P.3d at 1023 (emphasis added).

2014Id. 3 HRS § § 431:10C-104 provides in relevant part as follows: § 431:10C-104 Conditions of operation and registration of motor vehicles. (a) Except as provided in section 431:10C-105, no person shall operate or use a motor vehicle upon any public street, road, or highway of this State at any time unless such motor vehicle is insured at all times under a motor vehicle insurance policy. (b) Every owner of a motor vehicle used or operated at any time upon any public street, road, or highway of this State shall obtain a motor vehicle insurance policy upon such vehicle which provides the coverage

2008Because Judge Alm's comments were made in furtherance of the requirements of HRS § 706-606, the fact that Judge Alm described the evidence he reviewed and the nature, circumstances, and seriousness of Offerman's offenses in harsh terms, "without more, cannot be construed as an expression of the judge's bias or prejudice." State v. Ortiz, 91 Haw. 181, 195-97 , 981 P.2d 1127, 1141-43 (1999) (holding that the judge's comments during sentencing that the defendant was a "menace to society" and had devoted his life to a pursuit of financial gain through crime were not improper and did not warrant th

2008Because Judge Alm's comments were made in furtherance of the requirements of HRS § 706-606, the fact that Judge Alm described the evidence he reviewed and the nature, circumstances, and seriousness of Offerman's offenses in harsh terms, "without more, cannot be construed as an expression of the judge's bias or prejudice." State v. Ortiz, 91 Haw. 181, 195-97 , 981 P.2d 1127, 1141-43 (1999) (holding that the judge's comments during sentencing that the defendant was a "menace to society" and had devoted his life to a pursuit of financial gain through crime were not improper and did not warrant th

2008Because Judge Alm's comments were made in furtherance of the requirements of HRS § 706-606, the fact that Judge Alm described the evidence he reviewed and the nature, circumstances, and seriousness of Offerman's offenses in harsh terms, "without more, cannot be construed as an expression of the judge's bias or prejudice." State v. Ortiz, 91 Haw. 181, 195-97 , 981 P.2d 1127, 1141-43 (1999) (holding that the judge's comments during sentencing that the defendant was a "menace to society" and had devoted his life to a pursuit of financial gain through crime were not improper and did not warrant th

2003Moreover, Mat-sushita acknowledged that it was only after the arbitration decision that Daiichi’s attorneys requested that he “look through [the] lease files to see if [he] could find something that might indicate that Mr. Swope was more involved in representing [the trustees]” than Swope had disclosed in the SA and that, upon review of the arbitration decision, Daiichi “wanted to find some way to change the result of the arbitration.” Hobet Mining, Inc. v. Int’l Union, United Mine Workers of Am., 877 F.Supp. 1011, 1019 (S.D.W.Va.1994) (“[W]here information about an arbitrator is not known in

2003Moreover, Matsushita acknowledged that it was only after the arbitration decision that Daiichi's attorneys requested that he "look through [the] lease files to see if [he] could find something that might indicate that Mr. Swope was more involved in representing [the trustees]" than Swope had disclosed in the SA and that, upon review of the arbitration decision, Daiichi "wanted to find some way to change the result of the arbitration." Hobet Mining, Inc. v. Int'l Union, United Mine Workers of Am., 877 F.Supp. 1011, 1019 (S.D.W.Va.1994) ("[W]here information about an arbitrator is not known in a

1996In the course of its analysis, the Cooks majority noted that "the evidence offered in this case to support each of the alleged acts of penetration was materially identical, i.e., the complainant's equivocal testimony of an anal penetration, occurring in the same house over an unspecified three-day period ..., while only she and [the] defendant were in the room." Id. at 286 (footnote omitted).

1996In the course of its analysis, the Cooks majority noted that “the evidence offered in this case to support each of the alleged acts of penetration was materially identical, i.e., the complainant’s equivocal testimony of an anal penetration, occurring in the same house over an unspecified three-day period ..., while only she and [the] defendant were in the room.” Id. at 286 (footnote omitted).