§586-6 Notice of order. (a) Any order
issued under this chapter shall either be personally served upon the
respondent, or served by certified mail, unless the respondent was present at
the hearing in which case the respondent shall be deemed to have notice of the
order. A filed copy of each order issued under this chapter shall be served by
regular mail upon the chief of police of each county.
(b) Except as otherwise provided in this
chapter or in the order, a law enforcement officer as defined in section
701-118 may use a reliable copy, facsimile telecommunication, or other
reliable reproduction of an order issued pursuant to this chapter in lieu of
the original order for purposes of this section. Any such copy, facsimile
telecommunication, or other reproduction shall be a complete reproduction of
the entire original order and may only be transmitted from law enforcement
officer to law enforcement officer until served. [L 1982, c 123, pt of §2; am L
1987, c 315, §5; am L 1992, c 290, §5; am L 1993, c 215, §2; am L 1998, c 172,
§5; am L 2002, c 123, §1]
Rules of Court
Service, see HFCR rules 4, 5.
Case Notes
Compliance with unambiguous language of section precondition
for violation of order for protection under §586-11. 72 H. 493, 824 P.2d 106
(1992).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
8
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 1992–2026 · leading case:
State v. Shannon, 185 P.3d 200 (Haw. 2008).
State v. Shannon, 185 P.3d 200 (Haw. 2008).
· cites it 4× “2d at 106 , he had never been personally served with the order, contrary to HRS § 586-6, which then mandated that such orders " shall be personally served upon the respondent unless the respondent was present at the hearing in which case the respondent may be served by regular…”
State v. Grindling, 31 P.3d 915 (Haw. 2001).
· cites it 3× “See HRS 586-4(c) ("When a temporary restraining order is granted pursuant to this chapter and the respondent or person to be restrained knows of the order, violation of the restraining order is a misdemeanor.”
State v. Medina, 824 P.2d 106 (Haw. 1992).
· cites it 7× “The charge was dismissed because of the State’s failure to personally serve the order as required by HRS § 586-6. We affirm. *494 I. On July 17, 1990, Sieglinde Laminman (Laminman) filed an ex parte petition for a temporary restraining order with the Family Court of the Third…”
State v. Lee, 862 P.2d 295 (Haw. App. 1993).
· cites it 3× “Although the defendant had actual knowledge of the order, he had never been personally served with the order, contrary to HRS § 586-6, which then provided: Any order issued under this chapter shall be personally served upon the respondent unless the respondent was present at the…”
Kie v. McMahel, 984 P.2d 1264 (Haw. App. 1999).
“The ex parte order shall be effective upon service pursuant to section 586-6. (Emphases added.) Although not cited to by Defendant, the three-year order for protection also “prohibited [Defendant] from possessing or controlling any firearm, ammunition, firearm permit[,] or…”
State v. Cichy (Haw. App. 2025).
· cites it 6× “Whether a charge contains all essential elements of a charged offense is a question of law we review de novo under the right/wrong standard. State v. Wheeler, 121 Hawai#i 383, 390, 219 P.”
State v. Fernandez (Haw. App. 2026).
· cites it 4× “We further held that the defendant had not shown that the relevant complaint "cannot 3/ HRS § 586-6 (2018) states, in relevant part: Notice of Order.”
State v. Chau (Haw. 2026).
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall submit supplemental briefing addressing whether service is an element of the Violation of an Order for Protection offense following the 1998 amendment to Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes § 586-6. Supplemental briefs shall be filed by April…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.