§602-4 Superintendence of inferior courts.
The supreme court shall have the general superintendence of all courts of
inferior jurisdiction to prevent and correct errors and abuses therein where no
other remedy is expressly provided by law. [L 1892, c 57, §50; RL 1925, §2223;
RL 1935, §3592; RL 1945, §9603; RL 1955, §214-3; HRS §602-4; ree L 1979, c 111,
pt of §2]
Law Journals and Reviews
Through the Looking Glass--Finality, Interlocutory Appeals
and the Hawaii Supreme Court's Supervisory Powers. 9 UH L. Rev. 87 (1987).
The Application of the Collateral Order Doctrine to Criminal
Appeals in Hawai‘i. 19 UH L. Rev. 73 (1997).
Case Notes
Applied in disposing of appeal on points of law from an
illegal sentence. 13 H. 335 (1901).
Appeals in forma pauperis, powers of supreme court in
connection with. See 42 H. 1 (1957); 44 H. 31, 352 P.2d 616 (1959); 44 H. 52,
352 P.2d 629 (1959). But see 26 H. 469 (1922).
Circumstances supplied justification for exercise of court's
supervisory jurisdiction and court's power to issue prohibition. 59 H. 224,
580 P.2d 49 (1978).
Supervisory power under section invoked to provide needed
guidance on matter of grave public concern. 59 H. 224, 580 P.2d 49 (1978).
Supervisory jurisdiction invoked where submission to
warrantless searches apparently standard condition of probation. 67 H. 268,
686 P.2d 1379 (1984).
Supervisory jurisdiction invoked to declare judge personally
entering the jury room to answer the jurors' questions improper and
prejudicial. 69 H. 204, 738 P.2d 812 (1987).
Supreme court invoked supervisory jurisdiction over district
court judge. 71 H. 304, 788 P.2d 1281 (1990).
Exercise of supreme court's supervisory powers was not
appropriate in case where defendant was not without remedy expressly provided
by law; §641-11 and HRAP rule 4(b) provided defendant opportunity to appeal
from final judgment and HRPP rule 40 may have provided defendant opportunity to
contest validity of no-contest plea by post-conviction petition. 96 H. 462
(App.), 32 P.3d 106 (2001).
Mentioned: 79 H. 26, 897 P.2d 953 (1995).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
72
cases (
13 in the last 5 years), 1970–2026 · leading case:
State v. Matavale, 166 P.3d 322 (Haw. 2007).
State v. Matavale, 166 P.3d 322 (Haw. 2007).
· cites it 12× “Second, I believe the instruction given by the family court of the first circuit (the court) to the "deadlocked" jury was incorrect and, also, that that instruction must be addressed in light of our supervisory jurisdiction under HRS § 602-4 (1993) and in light of the dissent's…”
Honda Ex Rel. Honda v. Bd. of Trs. of the Employees' Ret. Sys., 118 P.3d 1155 (Haw. 2005).
· cites it 21× “4, the majority's exercise of HRS §§ 602-4 and 602-5(7) "review" (1) radically diverges from our plain error jurisprudence by allowing this court to entertain arguments not raised by either party with virtually no limitation, thereby eviscerating the raison d'être of the plain…”
State v. Cabagbag, 277 P.3d 1027 (Haw. 2012).
· cites it 12× “See HRS § 602-4. [22] This court has previously invoked its supervisory powers to adopt new procedural requirements to prevent error in the trial courts, see, e.”
State v. Baxley, 73 P.3d 668 (Haw. 2003).
· cites it 20× “3d at 592 , and (5) by requesting exercise of this court's supervisory powers pursuant to HRS § 602-4, see id. at 317, 22 P.3d at 596 .”
State v. Nicol., 403 P.3d 259 (Haw. 2017).
· cites it 8× “See HRS § 641-17 (Supp. 2004). In addition to the rights of appeal set forth in chapter 641, this court has on several occasions stated that its statutory supervisory powers set forth in HRS § 602-4 (1993) 6 may provide it with an independent jurisdictional basis to “prevent and…”
State v. Fields, 686 P.2d 1379 (Haw. 1984).
· cites it 8× “HRS § 602-4. [5] Concomitantly, we have been endowed with authority "to prevent and correct errors and abuses therein where no other remedy is expressly provided by law.”
State v. Pattioay, 896 P.2d 911 (Haw. 1995).
· cites it 8× “2d 1 (1971), which states that "[t]he objective of deterring improper police conduct is only part of the larger objective of safeguarding the integrity of our adversary system"); HRS § 602-4 (1985). [27] See also State v.”
State v. Martin. ICA s.d.o., filed 03/29/2019., 463 P.3d 1022 (Haw. 2020).
· cites it 4× “Pursuant to HRS § 602-4 (2016),2 we therefore provide guidance to the trial courts for any future cases in which evidence of a suicide or suicide attempt is proffered as evidence of consciousness of guilt.”
State v. Maluia, 108 P.3d 974 (Haw. 2005).
· cites it 4× “[6] See HRS § 602-4 (1993) ("The supreme court shall have the general superintendence of all courts of inferior jurisdiction to prevent and correct errors and abuses therein where no other remedy is expressly provided by law.”
Greer v. Baker., 369 P.3d 832 (Haw. 2016).
· cites it 2× “Baker argues in the alternative that this court should exercise supervisory jurisdiction pursuant to HRS §§ 602-4 and 602-5. In view of our disposition of this appeal, we do not address this argument.”
State v. Kealaiki, 22 P.3d 588 (Haw. 2001).
· cites it 5× “8 We could assert supervisory jurisdiction under HRS § 602-4 (1993) over the trial courts “ ‘to prevent and correct errors and abuses therein where no other remedy is expressly provided for by law[.”
State v. Estrada, 738 P.2d 812 (Haw. 1987).
· cites it 4× ““This appeal presents us with an urgent reason to invoke our supervisory jurisdiction over all courts of inferior jurisdiction pursuant to HRS § 602-4 [1985].” 10 State v. Swafford, 68 Haw__, _, 729 P.”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 602-4(1993) — 1 case
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.