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 2003–2022 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. Miyashirogreen2 sentences2022"Because the circuit court's response to a jury communication is the functional equivalent of an instruction, the standard of review for jury instructions also applies to reviewing a trial court's answers to jury communications." State v. Miyashiro, 90 Hawai#i 489, 492, 979 P.2d 85, 88 (App. 1999). 2010There are no transcripts of the witness[es]' testimony." This court has previously held that "[b]ecause the circuit court's response to a jury communication is the functional equivalent of an instruction, the standard of review for jury instructions also applies to reviewing a trial court's answers to jury communications." State v. Miyashiro, 90 Hawai`i 489, 492, 979 P.2d 85, 88 (App. 1999) (trial court's failure to provide unanimity instruction in response to jury's request for information on charged offense was misleading). | 3 | 3 |
State v. Gonsalvesgreen2 sentences2006Such responses are “the functional equivalent of an instruction[,]” State v. Gonsalves, 108 Hawai'i 289, 293 , 119 P.3d 597, 601 (2005) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted), and if a defendant has no right to be present during the settlement of jury instructions, State v. Samuel, 74 Haw. 141, 155 , 838 P.2d 1374, 1381 (1992) (“a defendant does not have a constitutional or statutory right to attend a conference determining the legal instructions with which the trial court will charge the jury”), we cannot see how any right of Defendant’s was derogated when the settlement of responses 2006Such responses are “the functional equivalent of an instruction[,]” State v. Gonsalves, 108 Hawai'i 289, 293 , 119 P.3d 597, 601 (2005) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted), and if a defendant has no right to be present during the settlement of jury instructions, State v. Samuel, 74 Haw. 141, 155 , 838 P.2d 1374, 1381 (1992) (“a defendant does not have a constitutional or statutory right to attend a conference determining the legal instructions with which the trial court will charge the jury”), we cannot see how any right of Defendant’s was derogated when the settlement of responses | 2 | 2 |
State v. Uyesugigreen2 sentences2005State v. Arceo, 84 Hawai'i 1, 11-12 , 928 P.2d 843, 853-54 (1996) (footnote omitted). "[T]he circuit court's response to a jury communication is the functional equivalent of an instruction." State v. Haili, 103 Hawai'i 89, 101 , 79 P.3d 1263, 1275 (2003) (quoting State v. Uyesugi, 100 Hawai'i 442, 458 , 60 P.3d 843, 859 (2002) (citations and internal quotation signals omitted)). 2005State v. Arceo, 84 Hawai'i 1, 11-12 , 928 P.2d 843, 853-54 (1996) (footnote omitted). "[T]he circuit court's response to a jury communication is the functional equivalent of an instruction." State v. Haili, 103 Hawai'i 89, 101 , 79 P.3d 1263, 1275 (2003) (quoting State v. Uyesugi, 100 Hawai'i 442, 458 , 60 P.3d 843, 859 (2002) (citations and internal quotation signals omitted)). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Kinnanegreen1 sentence2010When jury instructions are at issue on appeal, "the standard of review is whether, when read and considered as a whole, the instructions given are prejudicially insufficient, erroneous, inconsistent, or misleading." State v. Gonsalves, 108 Hawai`i 289, 292, 119 P.3d 597, 600 (2005) (quoting State v. Kinnane, 79 Hawai`i 46, 49 897 P.2d 973, 976 (1995)) (internal quotation marks omitted). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Samuelgreen2 sentences2006Such responses are “the functional equivalent of an instruction[,]” State v. Gonsalves, 108 Hawai'i 289, 293 , 119 P.3d 597, 601 (2005) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted), and if a defendant has no right to be present during the settlement of jury instructions, State v. Samuel, 74 Haw. 141, 155 , 838 P.2d 1374, 1381 (1992) (“a defendant does not have a constitutional or statutory right to attend a conference determining the legal instructions with which the trial court will charge the jury”), we cannot see how any right of Defendant’s was derogated when the settlement of responses 2006Such responses are “the functional equivalent of an instruction[,]” State v. Gonsalves, 108 Hawai'i 289, 293 , 119 P.3d 597, 601 (2005) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted), and if a defendant has no right to be present during the settlement of jury instructions, State v. Samuel, 74 Haw. 141, 155 , 838 P.2d 1374, 1381 (1992) (“a defendant does not have a constitutional or statutory right to attend a conference determining the legal instructions with which the trial court will charge the jury”), we cannot see how any right of Defendant’s was derogated when the settlement of responses | 1 | 1 |
State v. Hailigreen2 sentences2005State v. Arceo, 84 Hawai'i 1, 11-12 , 928 P.2d 843, 853-54 (1996) (footnote omitted). "[T]he circuit court's response to a jury communication is the functional equivalent of an instruction." State v. Haili, 103 Hawai'i 89, 101 , 79 P.3d 1263, 1275 (2003) (quoting State v. Uyesugi, 100 Hawai'i 442, 458 , 60 P.3d 843, 859 (2002) (citations and internal quotation signals omitted)). 2005State v. Arceo, 84 Hawai'i 1, 11-12 , 928 P.2d 843, 853-54 (1996) (footnote omitted). "[T]he circuit court's response to a jury communication is the functional equivalent of an instruction." State v. Haili, 103 Hawai'i 89, 101 , 79 P.3d 1263, 1275 (2003) (quoting State v. Uyesugi, 100 Hawai'i 442, 458 , 60 P.3d 843, 859 (2002) (citations and internal quotation signals omitted)). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Arceogreen2 sentences2005State v. Arceo, 84 Hawai'i 1, 11-12 , 928 P.2d 843, 853-54 (1996) (footnote omitted). "[T]he circuit court's response to a jury communication is the functional equivalent of an instruction." State v. Haili, 103 Hawai'i 89, 101 , 79 P.3d 1263, 1275 (2003) (quoting State v. Uyesugi, 100 Hawai'i 442, 458 , 60 P.3d 843, 859 (2002) (citations and internal quotation signals omitted)). 2005State v. Arceo, 84 Hawai'i 1, 11-12 , 928 P.2d 843, 853-54 (1996) (footnote omitted). "[T]he circuit court's response to a jury communication is the functional equivalent of an instruction." State v. Haili, 103 Hawai'i 89, 101 , 79 P.3d 1263, 1275 (2003) (quoting State v. Uyesugi, 100 Hawai'i 442, 458 , 60 P.3d 843, 859 (2002) (citations and internal quotation signals omitted)). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Balanzagreen2 sentences2003Jury instructions and response to jury communications "The standard of review for a trial court's issuance or refusal of a jury instruction is whether, when read and considered as a whole, the instructions given are prejudicially insufficient, erroneous, inconsistent, or misleading." State v. Balanza, 93 Hawai'i 279, 283 , 1 P.3d 281, 285 (2000) (citations and internal quotation signals omitted). "[T]he circuit court's response to a jury communication is the functional equivalent of an instruction." State v. Uyesugi, 100 Hawai'i 442, 458 , 60 P.3d 843, 859 (2002) (citations and internal quotat 2003Jury instructions and response to jury communications "The standard of review for a trial court's issuance or refusal of a jury instruction is whether, when read and considered as a whole, the instructions given are prejudicially insufficient, erroneous, inconsistent, or misleading." State v. Balanza, 93 Hawai'i 279, 283 , 1 P.3d 281, 285 (2000) (citations and internal quotation signals omitted). "[T]he circuit court's response to a jury communication is the functional equivalent of an instruction." State v. Uyesugi, 100 Hawai'i 442, 458 , 60 P.3d 843, 859 (2002) (citations and internal quotat | 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. Mark
green
1 sentence2022We addressed a similar issue in State v. Mark, 120 Hawai#i 499, 210 P.3d 22 (App. 2009), aff'd, 123 Hawai#i 205, 231 P.3d 478 (2010). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Mark
green
1 sentence2022We addressed a similar issue in State v. Mark, 120 Hawai#i 499, 210 P.3d 22 (App. 2009), aff'd, 123 Hawai#i 205, 231 P.3d 478 (2010). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.