form waiver (Hawaii) · Go Syfert
← Hawaii issues

form waiver in Hawaii

5 Hawaii opinions name it 1 courts 1969–2016 0 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.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Miyasakigreen
haw · 1980 · cited in 1 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 1994–1994
2 sentences

1994In any event, contrary to Feldhacker’s claim that he acquired “use immunity,” the only form of immunity authorized by Hawaii law is the transactional type. 8 There is no valid statute or Hawaii law that provides “use immunity.” See State v. Miyasaki, 62 Haw. 269, 283-85 , 614 P.2d 915, 923-24 (1980) (holding, under article I, section 10 of the Hawaii Constitution, that HRS § 621C-3 9 is invalid because it does not place the witness in “substantially the same position as though he had not been compelled to produce evidence”).

1994In any event, contrary to Feldhacker’s claim that he acquired “use immunity,” the only form of immunity authorized by Hawaii law is the transactional type. 8 There is no valid statute or Hawaii law that provides “use immunity.” See State v. Miyasaki, 62 Haw. 269, 283-85 , 614 P.2d 915, 923-24 (1980) (holding, under article I, section 10 of the Hawaii Constitution, that HRS § 621C-3 9 is invalid because it does not place the witness in “substantially the same position as though he had not been compelled to produce evidence”).

11
Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United Statesgreen
scotus · 1920 · cited in 1 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 1969–1969
2 sentences

1969To say that the defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel because he signed the form of waiver presented to him by the detective is to ignore substance to “a form of words.” cf. Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States, 251 U.S. 385, 392 (1920); Miranda v. Arizona, supra at 444 .

1969To say that the defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel because he signed the form of waiver presented to him by the detective is to ignore substance to "a form *510 of words." cf. Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States, 251 U.S. 385, 392 , 40 S.Ct. 182 , 64 L.Ed. 319 (1920); Miranda v. Arizona, supra at 444 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 .

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Hawaii. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (3)

CaseCitedYears
People v. . Molineux green
ny · 1901
2 sentences

1975The landmark opinion from which many such opinions sprang is that of Judge Werner of the New York Court of Appeals in People v. Molineux, 168 N.Y. 264 , 61 N.E.286 (1901).

1975The landmark opinion from which many such opinions sprang is that of Judge Werner of the New York Court of Appeals in People v. Molineux, 168 N.Y. 264 , 61 N.E. 286 (1901).

21975–1975
State v. Smith green
haw · 1978
2 sentences

2016Defense counsel objected to the initial form of the instruction on the basis that “it takes two sentences which are not only out of order but out of context [from Smith, 59 Haw. 456 , 583 P.2d 337 ].” The court modified the instruction so that the second sentence of the instruction read, “a person may be deemed to be in custody when released from a correctional or detention facility on furlough and legally bound by restrictions.” The State objected to the modification.

2016Defense counsel objected to the initial form of the instruction on the basis that “it takes two sentences which are not only out of order but out of context [from Smith, 59 Haw. 456 , 583 P.2d 337 ].” The court modified the instruction so that the second sentence of the instruction read, “a person may be deemed to be in custody when released from a correctional or detention facility on furlough and legally bound by restrictions.” The State objected to the modification.

12016–2016
Miranda v. Arizona green
scotus · 1966
2 sentences

1969To say that the defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel because he signed the form of waiver presented to him by the detective is to ignore substance to “a form of words.” cf. Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States, 251 U.S. 385, 392 (1920); Miranda v. Arizona, supra at 444 .

1969To say that the defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel because he signed the form of waiver presented to him by the detective is to ignore substance to "a form *510 of words." cf. Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States, 251 U.S. 385, 392 , 40 S.Ct. 182 , 64 L.Ed. 319 (1920); Miranda v. Arizona, supra at 444 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 .

11969–1969

Statutes the citing opinions construe

HI § Haw. Rev. Stat. § 706-661 (3) HI § Haw. Rev. Stat. § 706-662 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

CA 259 (1858–2025) IL 108 (1878–2025) MO 93 (1886–2025) TX 87 (1880–2026) KY 73 (1922–2025) PA 67 (1892–2026) NY 66 (1867–2024) FL 48 (1925–2020) IN 44 (1917–2025) WA 34 (1915–2019) NJ 34 (1898–2025) MA 31 (1923–2025) NC 31 (1903–2021) AL 31 (1859–2015) MS 28 (1923–2019) LA 28 (1904–2024) AZ 27 (1903–2023) OH 26 (1856–2024) MI 26 (1877–2025) MD 25 (1920–2023) OR 25 (1912–2023) IA 25 (1904–2026) NM 24 (1906–2025) CT 20 (1931–2022) WI 19 (1925–2025) AR 19 (1908–2025) ID 17 (1892–2025) SD 17 (1921–2024) CO 16 (1964–2025) WV 15 (1893–2024) TN 15 (1896–2024) GA 14 (1904–2026) KS 13 (1903–2010) DC 13 (1971–2020) VT 13 (1975–2026) OK 11 (1912–2011) NV 11 (1914–2022) VA 10 (1912–2019) WY 9 (1929–2008) NE 9 (1909–1996) DE 9 (1952–2024) MN 8 (1932–2014) ND 7 (1927–2025) MT 6 (1887–1986) UT 6 (1969–2020) HI 5 (1969–2016) ME 5 (1972–2021) AK 5 (1992–2016) SC 3 (1904–1953) RI 2 (1903–1997)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check