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 1981–2016 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Woodruff v. Kealegreen2 sentences1990According to Woodruff v. Keale, 64 Haw. 85, 95 , 637 P.2d 760, 767 (1981): The void for vagueness doctrine, as traditionally applied to criminal statutes, requires inquiry into the following: (a) Whether the statute provides fair warning of proscribed conduct; (b) whether it provides clear guidelines so as to prevent arbitrary application and enforcement; and (c) whether the statute “overreaches” by lack of clarity so as to prohibit lawful or constitutionally protected, as well as unlawful, activities. 1990According to Woodruff v. Keale, 64 Haw. 85, 95 , 637 P.2d 760, 767 (1981): The void for vagueness doctrine, as traditionally applied to criminal statutes, requires inquiry into the following: (a) Whether the statute provides fair warning of proscribed conduct; (b) whether it provides clear guidelines so as to prevent arbitrary application and enforcement; and (c) whether the statute “overreaches” by lack of clarity so as to prohibit lawful or constitutionally protected, as well as unlawful, activities. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Manzogreen2 sentences1981The void for vagueness doctrine, as traditionally applied to criminal statutes, requires inquiry into the following: (a) Whether the statute provides fair warning of proscribed conduct, Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 108 (1972); State v. Kaneakua, 61 Haw. 136 , 597 P.2d 590 (1979); State v. Manzo, 58 Haw. 440, 454 , 573 P.2d 945, 954 (1977); (b) whether it provides clear guidelines so as to prevent arbitrary application and enforcement, State v. Kaneakua, supra; State v. Kimball, 54 Haw. 83 , 503 P.2d 176 (1972); State v. Grahovac, 52 Haw. 527 , 480 P.2d 148 (1971); and (c) whether 1981The void for vagueness doctrine, as traditionally applied to criminal statutes, requires inquiry into the following: (a) Whether the statute provides fair warning of proscribed conduct, Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 108 (1972); State v. Kaneakua, 61 Haw. 136 , 597 P.2d 590 (1979); State v. Manzo, 58 Haw. 440, 454 , 573 P.2d 945, 954 (1977); (b) whether it provides clear guidelines so as to prevent arbitrary application and enforcement, State v. Kaneakua, supra; State v. Kimball, 54 Haw. 83 , 503 P.2d 176 (1972); State v. Grahovac, 52 Haw. 527 , 480 P.2d 148 (1971); and (c) whether | 1 | 1 |
Grayned v. City of Rockfordgreen2 sentences1981The void for vagueness doctrine, as traditionally applied to criminal statutes, requires inquiry into the following: (a) Whether the statute provides fair warning of proscribed conduct, Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 108 (1972); State v. Kaneakua, 61 Haw. 136 , 597 P.2d 590 (1979); State v. Manzo, 58 Haw. 440, 454 , 573 P.2d 945, 954 (1977); (b) whether it provides clear guidelines so as to prevent arbitrary application and enforcement, State v. Kaneakua, supra; State v. Kimball, 54 Haw. 83 , 503 P.2d 176 (1972); State v. Grahovac, 52 Haw. 527 , 480 P.2d 148 (1971); and (c) whether 1981The void for vagueness doctrine, as traditionally applied to criminal statutes, requires inquiry into the following: (a) Whether the statute provides fair warning of proscribed conduct, Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 108 (1972); State v. Kaneakua, 61 Haw. 136 , 597 P.2d 590 (1979); State v. Manzo, 58 Haw. 440, 454 , 573 P.2d 945, 954 (1977); (b) whether it provides clear guidelines so as to prevent arbitrary application and enforcement, State v. Kaneakua, supra; State v. Kimball, 54 Haw. 83 , 503 P.2d 176 (1972); State v. Grahovac, 52 Haw. 527 , 480 P.2d 148 (1971); and (c) whether | 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. Beltran
green
2 sentences2016Beltran, 116 Hawai'i at 153 , 172 P.3d at 465 . 2016Beltran, 116 Hawai'i at 153 , 172 P.3d at 465 . | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Kolender v. Lawson
green
1 sentence2007As stated by the Court, “the void-for-vagueness doctrine requires that a penal statute define the criminal offense with sufficient definiteness that ordinary people can understand what conduct is prohibited and in a manner that does not encourage arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement.’” Id. (citing Hoffman Estates, supra) (other citations omitted). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
State v. Bates
green
2 sentences2003Bates, 84 Hawai'i at 220-21 , 933 P.2d at 57-58 . 2003Bates, 84 Hawai'i at 220-21 , 933 P.2d at 57-58 . | 1 | 2003–2003 |
State v. Grahovac
green
2 sentences1981The void for vagueness doctrine, as traditionally applied to criminal statutes, requires inquiry into the following: (a) Whether the statute provides fair warning of proscribed conduct, Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 108 (1972); State v. Kaneakua, 61 Haw. 136 , 597 P.2d 590 (1979); State v. Manzo, 58 Haw. 440, 454 , 573 P.2d 945, 954 (1977); (b) whether it provides clear guidelines so as to prevent arbitrary application and enforcement, State v. Kaneakua, supra; State v. Kimball, 54 Haw. 83 , 503 P.2d 176 (1972); State v. Grahovac, 52 Haw. 527 , 480 P.2d 148 (1971); and (c) whether 1981The void for vagueness doctrine, as traditionally applied to criminal statutes, requires inquiry into the following: (a) Whether the statute provides fair warning of proscribed conduct, Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 108 (1972); State v. Kaneakua, 61 Haw. 136 , 597 P.2d 590 (1979); State v. Manzo, 58 Haw. 440, 454 , 573 P.2d 945, 954 (1977); (b) whether it provides clear guidelines so as to prevent arbitrary application and enforcement, State v. Kaneakua, supra; State v. Kimball, 54 Haw. 83 , 503 P.2d 176 (1972); State v. Grahovac, 52 Haw. 527 , 480 P.2d 148 (1971); and (c) whether | 1 | 1981–1981 |
State v. Kaneakua
green
2 sentences1981The void for vagueness doctrine, as traditionally applied to criminal statutes, requires inquiry into the following: (a) Whether the statute provides fair warning of proscribed conduct, Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 108 (1972); State v. Kaneakua, 61 Haw. 136 , 597 P.2d 590 (1979); State v. Manzo, 58 Haw. 440, 454 , 573 P.2d 945, 954 (1977); (b) whether it provides clear guidelines so as to prevent arbitrary application and enforcement, State v. Kaneakua, supra; State v. Kimball, 54 Haw. 83 , 503 P.2d 176 (1972); State v. Grahovac, 52 Haw. 527 , 480 P.2d 148 (1971); and (c) whether 1981The void for vagueness doctrine, as traditionally applied to criminal statutes, requires inquiry into the following: (a) Whether the statute provides fair warning of proscribed conduct, Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 108 (1972); State v. Kaneakua, 61 Haw. 136 , 597 P.2d 590 (1979); State v. Manzo, 58 Haw. 440, 454 , 573 P.2d 945, 954 (1977); (b) whether it provides clear guidelines so as to prevent arbitrary application and enforcement, State v. Kaneakua, supra; State v. Kimball, 54 Haw. 83 , 503 P.2d 176 (1972); State v. Grahovac, 52 Haw. 527 , 480 P.2d 148 (1971); and (c) whether | 1 | 1981–1981 |
State v. Kimball
green
2 sentences1981The void for vagueness doctrine, as traditionally applied to criminal statutes, requires inquiry into the following: (a) Whether the statute provides fair warning of proscribed conduct, Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 108 (1972); State v. Kaneakua, 61 Haw. 136 , 597 P.2d 590 (1979); State v. Manzo, 58 Haw. 440, 454 , 573 P.2d 945, 954 (1977); (b) whether it provides clear guidelines so as to prevent arbitrary application and enforcement, State v. Kaneakua, supra; State v. Kimball, 54 Haw. 83 , 503 P.2d 176 (1972); State v. Grahovac, 52 Haw. 527 , 480 P.2d 148 (1971); and (c) whether 1981The void for vagueness doctrine, as traditionally applied to criminal statutes, requires inquiry into the following: (a) Whether the statute provides fair warning of proscribed conduct, Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 108 (1972); State v. Kaneakua, 61 Haw. 136 , 597 P.2d 590 (1979); State v. Manzo, 58 Haw. 440, 454 , 573 P.2d 945, 954 (1977); (b) whether it provides clear guidelines so as to prevent arbitrary application and enforcement, State v. Kaneakua, supra; State v. Kimball, 54 Haw. 83 , 503 P.2d 176 (1972); State v. Grahovac, 52 Haw. 527 , 480 P.2d 148 (1971); and (c) whether | 1 | 1981–1981 |
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.