reasonable possibility error in Hawaii

2026"When jury instructions or the omission thereof 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. Metcalfe, 129 Hawaiʻi 206, 222, 297 P.3d 1062, 1078 (2013) (citations omitted). "[O]nce instructional error is demonstrated, we will vacate, without regard to whether timely objection was made, if there is a reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the defendant's conviction, i.e., that the erroneous jury instruction was not harmless bey

2026"When jury instructions or the omission thereof 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. Metcalfe, 129 Hawaiʻi 206, 222, 297 P.3d 1062, 1078 (2013) (citations omitted). "[O]nce instructional error is demonstrated, we will vacate, without regard to whether timely objection was made, if there is a reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the defendant's conviction, i.e., that the erroneous jury instruction was not harmless bey

2012In that context, the real question becomes whether there is a reasonable possibility that error might have contributed to conviction.” State v. Duncan, 101 Hawai'i 269, 278 , 67 P.3d 768, 777 (2003) (quoting State v. Heard, 64 Haw. 193, 194 , 638 P.2d 307, 308 (1981)).

2012In that context, the real question becomes whether there is a reasonable possibility that error might have contributed to conviction.” State v. Duncan, 101 Hawai'i 269, 278 , 67 P.3d 768, 777 (2003) (quoting State v. Heard, 64 Haw. 193, 194 , 638 P.2d 307, 308 (1981)).

2025"Allegations of prosecutorial misconduct are reviewed under the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard, which requires an examination of the record and a determination of 'whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction.'" Austin, 143 Hawai#i at 28–29, 422 P.3d at 28–29 (citing State v. Sawyer, 88 Hawai#i 325, 329 n.6, 966 P.2d 637 , 641 n.6 (1998) (quoting Balisbisana, 83 Hawai#i at 114, 924 P.2d at 1220 ).

2021"Allegations of prosecutorial misconduct are reviewed under the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard, which requires an examination of the record and a determination of 'whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction.'" Austin, 143 Hawai#i at 28, 422 P.3d at 28 (citing State v. Sawyer, 88 Hawai#i 325, 329 n.6, 966 P.2d 637 , 641 n.6 (1998) (quoting State v. Balisbisana, 83 Hawai#i 109, 114, 924 P.2d 1215, 1220 (1996))).

2022We review for plain error because of Prescott's contention that his constitutional right to a fair trial was violated. 8 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER "Allegations of prosecutorial misconduct[3] are reviewed under the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard, which requires an examination of the record and a determination of whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction." State v. Rogan, 91 Hawai#i 405, 412, 984 P.2d 1231, 1238 (1999) (cleaned up).

2021“Misconduct requires vacating a conviction when, in light of these factors, ‘there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction.’” State v. Underwood, 142 Hawai‘i 317, 325, 418 P.3d 658, 666 (2018) (emphasis added) (quoting State v. Rogan, 91 Hawai‘i 405, 412, 984 P.2d 1231, 1238 (1999)).

2023Our application of the harmless error rule in criminal cases is narrower, and the ultimate standard must always be “whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error might have contributed to conviction.” See Aplaca, 96 Hawaiʻi at 25, 27 n.7, 25 P.3d at 800 , 802 n.7 (quoting State v. Gano, 92 Hawaiʻi 161, 176, 988 P.2d 1153, 1168 (1999)).

2018If there is a reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the conviction, "the error is not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and the conviction must be set aside." Id. (citing State v. Gano , 92 Hawai'i 161 , 176, 988 P.2d 1153 , 1168 (1999) ).

2017Therefore, we conclude that the sidebar procedure followed here violated Hilario’s right to be present under HRPP Rule 43. 17 This does not end our inquiry, as violations of HRPP Rule 43 are analyzed under a harmless error standard, where we determine “whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction.” State v. Pauline, 100 Hawai'i 356, 378 , 60 P.3d 306, 328 (2002) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).

2017Therefore, we conclude that the sidebar procedure followed here violated Hilario’s right to be present under HRPP Rule 43. 17 This does not end our inquiry, as violations of HRPP Rule 43 are analyzed under a harmless error standard, where we determine “whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction.” State v. Pauline, 100 Hawai'i 356, 378 , 60 P.3d 306, 328 (2002) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).

2021Stanley, 148 Hawai#i at 500-01, 479 P.3d at 118 -19 (quoting State 7 FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER v. Holbron, 80 Hawai#i 27, 32, 904 P.2d 912, 917 , reconsideration denied, 80 Hawai#i 187, 907 P.2d 773 (1995)); see also State v. Nichols, 111 Hawai#i 327, 337, 141 P.3d 974, 984 (2006) ("[O]nce instructional error is demonstrated, we will vacate, without regard to whether timely objection was made, if there is a reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the defendant's conviction[.]").

2018In this context, "the real question becomes NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI'I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER whether there is a reasonable possibility that error might have contributed to conviction." State v. Arceo, 84 Hawai'i 1, 12, 928 P.2d 843, 854 (1996) (quoting State v. Holbron, 80 Hawai'i 27, 32, 904 P.2d 912, 917 (1995)).

2021"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." Id. at 39-40, 422 P.3d at 39 -40 (quoting State v. Clark, 83 Hawai#i 289, 304, 926 P.2d 194, 209 (1996) (quoting State v. McGriff, 76 Hawai#i 148, 158, 871 P.2d 782, 792 (1994))).

2020“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. McGriff, 76 Hawaiʻi 148, 158, 871 P.2d 782, 792 (1994).

2003Prosecutorial Misconduct Allegations of prosecutorial misconduct are reviewed under the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard, which requires an examination of the record and a determination of “whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction.” State v. Balisbisana, 83 Hawai'i 109, 114 , 924 P.2d 1215, 1220 (1996) (quoting State v. Holbron, 80 Hawai'i 27, 32 , 904 P.2d 912, 917 , reconsideration denied, 80 Hawai'i 187 , 907 P.2d 773 (1995)) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted); see also State v. Sanchez, 82 Hawai

2003Prosecutorial Misconduct Allegations of prosecutorial misconduct are reviewed under the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard, which requires an examination of the record and a determination of “whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction.” State v. Balisbisana, 83 Hawai'i 109, 114 , 924 P.2d 1215, 1220 (1996) (quoting State v. Holbron, 80 Hawai'i 27, 32 , 904 P.2d 912, 917 , reconsideration denied, 80 Hawai'i 187 , 907 P.2d 773 (1995)) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted); see also State v. Sanchez, 82 Hawai

2021State v. Nichols, 111 Hawai#i 327, 334, 141 P.3d 974, 981 (2006) (brackets omitted) (quoting State v. Gonsalves, 108 Hawai#i 289, 292-93, 119 P.3d 597, 600-01 (2005)) (citations omitted). "[E]rroneous jury instructions may be grounds for reversal despite counsel's failure to object at trial because it is ultimately the trial court that is responsible for ensuring that the jury is properly instructed." State v. Kikuta, 125 Hawai#i 78, 95, 253 P.3d 639, 656 (2011) (citing Nichols, 111 Hawai#i at 335, 141 P.3d at 982 ) (brackets and internal quotation marks omitted). "[O]nce instructional error i

2014"The real question becomes whether there is a reasonable possibility that error might have contributed to conviction." Id. (quoting Gonsalves, 108 Hawai‘i at 289, 119 P.3d at 601).

2020State v. Cullen, 86 Hawai#i 1, 8, 946 P.2d 955, 962 (1997) (citations and brackets omitted; block quote format altered) (quoting State v. Arceo, 84 Hawai#i 1, 11-12, 928 P.2d 843 , 853- 53 (1996)) .

2006State v. Cullen, 86 Hawai'i 1, 8 , 946 P.2d 955, 962 (1997) (internal quotation marks, citations, and brackets omitted; block quote format changed).

2020Ct. App. 2020) ("The district court did not err by placing the guilty option above the not guilty option in the verdict form given to the jury."). 7 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAII REPORTS OR THE PACIFIC REPORTER Here, after fully explaining the presumption of innocence and the concept of reasonable doubt, the Circuit Court articulated the circumstances under which the jury had a duty to find Char "guilty," and those under which it had a duty to find him "not guilty." Viewing the instructions as a whole, we conclude that the order of the last two sentences of the challenged instruction wa

2020Acacio, 140 Hawai‘i at 101 n.3, 398 P.3d at 690 n.3 (noting that this step in the analysis is not necessary when the threshold level of inquiry under the confrontation clause is not met). 27 ***FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER*** applying the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard the court is required to examine the record and determine whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction.” Id. (quoting State v. Pond, 118 Hawai‘i 452, 461, 193 P.3d 368, 377 (2008)).

2017An improper statement by the prosecutor in closing argument warrants a new trial if “there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction.” State v. Tuua, 125 Hawai'i 10, 16 , 250 P.3d 273, 279 (2011) (quoting State v. Hauge, 103 Hawai'i 38, 47 , 79 P.3d 131, 140 (2003)).

2017An improper statement by the prosecutor in closing argument warrants a new trial if “there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction.” State v. Tuua, 125 Hawai'i 10, 16 , 250 P.3d 273, 279 (2011) (quoting State v. Hauge, 103 Hawai'i 38, 47 , 79 P.3d 131, 140 (2003)).

2026"When jury instructions or the omission thereof 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. Metcalfe, 129 Hawai#i 206, 222, 297 P.3d 1062, 1078 (2013) (quoting Arceo, 84 Hawai#i at 11, 928 P.2d at 853). "[O]nce instructional error is demonstrated, we will vacate, without regard to whether timely objection was made, if there is a reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the defendant's conviction, i.e., that the erroneous jury i

2018In this context, "the real question becomes NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI'I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER whether there is a reasonable possibility that error might have contributed to conviction." State v. Arceo, 84 Hawai'i 1, 12, 928 P.2d 843, 854 (1996) (quoting State v. Holbron, 80 Hawai'i 27, 32, 904 P.2d 912, 917 (1995)).

2003Prosecutorial Misconduct Allegations of prosecutorial misconduct are reviewed under the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard, which requires an examination of the record and a determination of “whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction.” State v. Balisbisana, 83 Hawai'i 109, 114 , 924 P.2d 1215, 1220 (1996) (quoting State v. Holbron, 80 Hawai'i 27, 32 , 904 P.2d 912, 917 , reconsideration denied, 80 Hawai'i 187 , 907 P.2d 773 (1995)) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted); see also State v. Sanchez, 82 Hawai

2003Prosecutorial Misconduct Allegations of prosecutorial misconduct are reviewed under the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard, which requires an examination of the record and a determination of “whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction.” State v. Balisbisana, 83 Hawai'i 109, 114 , 924 P.2d 1215, 1220 (1996) (quoting State v. Holbron, 80 Hawai'i 27, 32 , 904 P.2d 912, 917 , reconsideration denied, 80 Hawai'i 187 , 907 P.2d 773 (1995)) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted); see also State v. Sanchez, 82 Hawai

2026Hearsay "Where the admissibility of evidence is determined by application of the hearsay rule, there can be only one correct result, and the appropriate standard for appellate review is the right/wrong standard." State v. Abrigo, 144 Hawai‘i 491, 497, 445 P.3d 72, 78 (2019) (cleaned up). 6 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER Prosecutorial Misconduct "Allegations of prosecutorial misconduct are reviewed under the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard, which requires an examination of the record and a determination of whether there is a reasonable possibility

2026Hearsay "Where the admissibility of evidence is determined by application of the hearsay rule, there can be only one correct result, and the appropriate standard for appellate review is the right/wrong standard." State v. Abrigo, 144 Hawai‘i 491, 497, 445 P.3d 72, 78 (2019) (cleaned up). 6 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER Prosecutorial Misconduct "Allegations of prosecutorial misconduct are reviewed under the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard, which requires an examination of the record and a determination of whether there is a reasonable possibility

2022"In applying the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard[,] the court is required to examine the record and determine whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction." Id. at 481, 463 P.3d at 1138 (quoting State v. Mundon, 121 Hawai#i 339, 368, 219 P.3d 1126, 1155 (2009)).

2021There is “a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction.” Gallagher, 146 Hawai‘i at 481, 463 P.3d at 1138 (quoting State v. Mundon, 121 Hawai‘i 339, 368, 219 P.3d 1126, 1155 (2009)).

2018“The relevant question under the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard is whether there is a reasonable possibility that error might have contributed to [the] conviction.” Han, 130 Hawai‘i at 93, 306 P.3d at 138 (quoting State v. Schnabel, 127 Hawai‘i 432, 450, 279 P.3d 1237, 1255 (2012)). 21 ***FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER*** Had Eduwensuyi testified, he may have been able to contest the State’s case and shed light on whether he operated a vehicle under the influence of an intoxicant in violation of HRS § 291E-61(a)(1).

2017Under the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard, "[t]he relevant question ... is whether there is a reasonable possibility that error might have contributed to [the] conviction." Id., 306 P.3d at 138 (quoting State v. Schnabel, 127 Hawai'i 432, 450 , 279 P.3d 1237, 1255 (2012)).

2026"The relevant question under the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard is whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error might have contributed to the conviction." State v. Eduwensuyi, 141 Hawaiʻi 328, 336, 409 P.3d 732 , 740 (2018) (cleaned up) (quoting State v. Han, 130 Hawaiʻi 83, 93, 306 P.3d 128, 138 (2013)).

2026"The relevant question under the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard is whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error might have contributed to the conviction." State v. Eduwensuyi, 141 Hawaiʻi 328, 336, 409 P.3d 732, 740 (2018) (cleaned up) (quoting State v. Han, 130 Hawaiʻi 83, 93, 306 P.3d 128, 138 (2013)).

2021In State v. Kikuta, 125 Hawai#i 78, 253 P.3d 639 (2011), the Hawai#i Supreme Court stated with regard to plain error review of erroneous jury instructions that: once instructional error is demonstrated, this court will vacate the judgment of the court, without regard to whether timely objection was made, if there is a reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the defendant's conviction, i.e., that the erroneous jury instruction was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

2021State v. Nichols, 111 Hawai#i 327, 334, 141 P.3d 974, 981 (2006) (brackets omitted) (quoting State v. Gonsalves, 108 Hawai#i 289, 292-93, 119 P.3d 597, 600-01 (2005)) (citations omitted). "[E]rroneous jury instructions may be grounds for reversal despite counsel's failure to object at trial because it is ultimately the trial court that is responsible for ensuring that the jury is properly instructed." State v. Kikuta, 125 Hawai#i 78, 95, 253 P.3d 639, 656 (2011) (citing Nichols, 111 Hawai#i at 335, 141 P.3d at 982 ) (brackets and internal quotation marks omitted). "[O]nce instructional error i

2021Prosecutorial Misconduct “Allegations of prosecutorial misconduct are reviewed under the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard, which requires an examination of the record and a determination of whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error 19 *** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER *** complained of might have contributed to the conviction.” State v. Pacheco, 96 Hawai‘i 83, 93, 26 P.3d 572, 582 (2001) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

2011An improper comment warrants a new trial if “there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction.” See Hauge, 103 Hawai'i at 47 , 79 P.3d at 140 (internal quotation marks and block quote formatting omitted) (quoting State v. Pacheco, 96 Hawai'i 83, 93 , 26 P.3d 572, 582 (2001)). 1.

2025"Allegations of prosecutorial misconduct are reviewed under the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard, which requires an examination of the record and a determination of 'whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction.'" Austin, 143 Hawai#i at 28–29, 422 P.3d at 28–29 (citing State v. Sawyer, 88 Hawai#i 325, 329 n.6, 966 P.2d 637 , 641 n.6 (1998) (quoting Balisbisana, 83 Hawai#i at 114, 924 P.2d at 1220 ).

2021Allegations of prosecutorial misconduct are reviewed under the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard, which requires an examination of the record and a determination of whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction. 2 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER State v. Austin, 143 Hawai#i 18, 28, 422 P.3d 18, 28 (2018) (quoting State v. Sawyer, 88 Hawai#i 325, 329 n.6, 966 P.2d 637 , 641 n.6 (1998)) (internal quotation marks omitted).

2023"The erroneous admission of evidence is not harmless when there is a reasonable possibility that the error might have contributed to the conviction." State v. Baker, 147 Hawai#i 413, 435, 465 P.3d 860, 882 (2020) (citing State v. McCrory, 104 Hawai#i 203, 210, 87 P.3d 275, 282 (2004)).

2023"The 10 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER erroneous admission of evidence is not harmless when there is a reasonable possibility that the error might have contributed to the conviction." State v. Baker, 147 Hawai#i 413, 435, 465 P.3d 860, 882 (2020) (emphasis added) (citing State v. McCrory, 104 Hawai#i 203, 210, 87 P.3d 275, 282 (2004)).

2015State v. Gano, 92 Hawai'i 161, 176 , 988 P.2d 1153, 1168 (1999) (citing State v. Pulse, 83 Hawai'i 229, 248 , 925 P.2d 797, 816 (1996)); see also Tuua, 125 Hawai'i at 16 , 250 P.3d at 279 (“An improper comment warrants a new trial if ‘there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction.’ ” (quoting State v. Hauge, 103 Hawai'i 38, 47 , 79 P.3d 131, 140 (2003)).

2015State v. Gano, 92 Hawai'i 161, 176 , 988 P.2d 1153, 1168 (1999) (citing State v. Pulse, 83 Hawai'i 229, 248 , 925 P.2d 797, 816 (1996)); see also Tuua, 125 Hawai'i at 16 , 250 P.3d at 279 (“An improper comment warrants a new trial if ‘there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction.’ ” (quoting State v. Hauge, 103 Hawai'i 38, 47 , 79 P.3d 131, 140 (2003)).

2026"The relevant question under the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard is whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error might have contributed to the conviction." State v. Eduwensuyi, 141 Hawaiʻi 328, 336, 409 P.3d 732 , 740 (2018) (cleaned up) (quoting State v. Han, 130 Hawaiʻi 83, 93, 306 P.3d 128, 138 (2013)).

2026"The relevant question under the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard is whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error might have contributed to the conviction." State v. Eduwensuyi, 141 Hawaiʻi 328, 336, 409 P.3d 732, 740 (2018) (cleaned up) (quoting State v. Han, 130 Hawaiʻi 83, 93, 306 P.3d 128, 138 (2013)).

2019As we stated in State v. Sawyer: Allegations of prosecutorial misconduct are reviewed under the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard, which requires an examination of the record and a determination of “whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction.” Factors considered are: (1) the nature of the conduct; (2) the promptness of a curative instruction; and (3) the strength or weakness of the evidence against the defendant. 88 Hawaiʻi 325, 329 n.6, 966 P.2d 637 , 641 n.6 (1998) (quoting State v. Balisbisana, 83 Hawaiʻi 109, 11

2018This requires an examination of the record and a determination of "whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction." Id. (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).