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 1977–2021 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. Clarkgreen1 sentence2021"Prosecutorial misconduct warrants a new trial or the setting aside of a guilty verdict only where the actions of the prosecutor have caused prejudice to the defendant's right to a fair trial." State v. Mara, 98 Hawai#i 1, 16, 41 P.3d 157, 172 (2002) (quoting State v. Clark, 83 Hawai#i 289, 304, 926 P.2d 194, 209 (1996)). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Maragreen1 sentence2021"Prosecutorial misconduct warrants a new trial or the setting aside of a guilty verdict only where the actions of the prosecutor have caused prejudice to the defendant's right to a fair trial." State v. Mara, 98 Hawai#i 1, 16, 41 P.3d 157, 172 (2002) (quoting State v. Clark, 83 Hawai#i 289, 304, 926 P.2d 194, 209 (1996)). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Okumuragreen2 sentences2017State v. Okumura, 58 Haw. 425, 427 , 570 P.2d 848, 851 (1977). 2017State v. Okumura, 58 Haw. 425, 427 , 570 P.2d 848, 851 (1977). | 1 | 1 |
In Re the Trust Estate Created by Weillgreen2 sentences1998See also In re Weill's Trust Estate, 48 Haw. 553, 563 , 406 P.2d 718, 723 (1965) (noting that the presence of a clause in the will requiring the trustee to accumulate income to pay certain expenses "tends to negative any intention of the *208 testatrix that accumulation of any part of the net income of the trust estate should or might be made for any reason or purpose other than that specifically authorized by the clause”). 1998See also In re Weill's Trust Estate, 48 Haw. 553, 563 , 406 P.2d 718, 723 (1965) (noting that the presence of a clause in the will requiring the trustee to accumulate income to pay certain expenses "tends to negative any intention of the *208 testatrix that accumulation of any part of the net income of the trust estate should or might be made for any reason or purpose other than that specifically authorized by the clause”). | 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. Bullen
green
1 sentence2021Under the specific circumstances of this case, we conclude that the Circuit Court did not abuse its discretion in determining a mistrial was not warranted, where the defendant's ability to call the witness was not compromised.9 In its oral ruling denying the motion for mistrial, the Circuit Court found that Morris was taken into custody outside of the presence or hearing of the jurors, the jurors were listening to cross- examination at the time, the arrest was done without incident, and anyone in the hallway who saw the arrest were not the jurors 8 In Bullen, the Hawai#i Supreme Court held tha | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Territory v. Corum
green
1 sentence1992Territory v. Corum, 34 Haw. 167 (1937). | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Illinois v. Allen
green
2 sentences1977This exception w.as outlined in Illinois v. Allen, 397 U.S. 337 (1970), in which it was held that a defendant can lose his right to be present at trial if “... he... insists on conducting himself in a manner so disorderly, disruptive, and disrespectful of the court that his trial cannot be carried on with him in the courtroom. ” Id. at 343 . 1977This exception w.as outlined in Illinois v. Allen, 397 U.S. 337 (1970), in which it was held that a defendant can lose his right to be present at trial if “... he... insists on conducting himself in a manner so disorderly, disruptive, and disrespectful of the court that his trial cannot be carried on with him in the courtroom. ” Id. at 343 . | 1 | 1977–1977 |
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.