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.
5 Hawaii opinions name it 2 courts 1957–2025 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. Jimgreen2 sentences2025See generally State v. Jim, 58 Haw. 574, 575-76, 574 P.2d 521, 522-23 (1978). 2025See generally State v. Jim, 58 Haw. 574, 575-76, 574 P.2d 521, 522-23 (1978). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Merinogreen2 sentences2003See State v. Merino, 81 Hawai'i 198, 223 , 915 P.2d 672, 697 (1996) (“Where the request [to withdraw a plea] is made after sentence has been imposed, the ‘manifest injustice’ standard is applied.” (Citation omitted.)) However, inasmuch as we hold infra that Adams effectively waived the statute of limitations defense for Counts III, IV, V, and VI upon entry of his plea, it is unnecessary to reach the issue of whether Adams can partially withdraw or modify the plea agreement. 2003See State v. Merino, 81 Hawai'i 198, 223 , 915 P.2d 672, 697 (1996) (“Where the request [to withdraw a plea] is made after sentence has been imposed, the ‘manifest injustice’ standard is applied.” (Citation omitted.)) However, inasmuch as we hold infra that Adams effectively waived the statute of limitations defense for Counts III, IV, V, and VI upon entry of his plea, it is unnecessary to reach the issue of whether Adams can partially withdraw or modify the plea agreement. | 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. Sorino
green
2 sentences2005ICA’s lead opinion, 108 Hawai'i at 116 , 117 P.3d at 848 . 2005ICA’s lead opinion, 108 Hawai'i at 116 , 117 P.3d at 848 . | 1 | 2005–2005 |
United States v. Jack Lee Webster
green
1 sentence1978United States v. Webster, 468 F.2d 769 (9th Cir. 1972); Paradiso v. United States, supra. See also State v. Dicks, supra. “What the manifest injustice rule seeks to avoid is an opportunity for the defendant to test the severity of sentence before finally committing himself to a guilty plea. ” Sherman v. United States, supra, at 840. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Madison v. City & County of San Francisco
green
1 sentence1957Notwithstanding the manifest injustice of the doctrine, courts continue to hold political subdivisions immune from suit as well as liability because of the doctrine of stare decisis.” (This case cites Madison v. City and County of San Francisco, 106 Cal. App. [2d] 232, 234 P. [2d] 995 .) Pierce v. Yakima Valley Memorial Hospital Association, 260 P. (2d) 765 , in abandoning its previous rule of immunity for charitable hospitals, held that since the rule was created by the courts it might properly be modi *550 fied or abandoned by them, citing 38 Columbia Law Review 1485, 1489, and Borst v. Bors | 1 | 1957–1957 |
Pierce v. Yakima Valley Memorial Hospital Ass'n
green
1 sentence1957Notwithstanding the manifest injustice of the doctrine, courts continue to hold political subdivisions immune from suit as well as liability because of the doctrine of stare decisis.” (This case cites Madison v. City and County of San Francisco, 106 Cal. App. [2d] 232, 234 P. [2d] 995 .) Pierce v. Yakima Valley Memorial Hospital Association, 260 P. (2d) 765 , in abandoning its previous rule of immunity for charitable hospitals, held that since the rule was created by the courts it might properly be modi *550 fied or abandoned by them, citing 38 Columbia Law Review 1485, 1489, and Borst v. Bors | 1 | 1957–1957 |
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.