Haw. Rev. Stat. » Haw. Rev. Stat. / Chapter 635
Hawaii Revised Statutes

Haw. Rev. Stat. § 635-30 (2026)

  Peremptory challenges, criminal cases

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section HI-LEGcapitol.hawaii.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

     §635-30  Peremptory challenges, criminal cases.  In criminal cases, if the offense charged is punishable by life imprisonment, each side is entitled to twelve peremptory challenges.  If there are two or more defendants jointly put on trial for such an offense, each of the defendants shall be allowed six challenges.  In all other criminal trials by jury each side is entitled to three peremptory challenges.  If there are two or more defendants jointly put on trial for such an offense, each of the defendants shall be allowed two challenges.  In all cases the State shall be allowed as many challenges as are allowed to all defendants. [L 1903, c 38, §21; am L 1915, c 73, §1; RL 1925, §2419; am L 1932 1st, c 11, §2; RL 1935, §3737; RL 1945, §10113; RL 1955, §231-13; am imp L 1957, c 282; HRS §635-30; am L 1972, c 89, §2B(k)]

 

Rules of Court

 

  See HRPP rule 24(b).

  Sequence for challenging jurors, see RCC rule 17(f).

 

Law Journals and Reviews

 

  State v. Levinson:  Limitations on a Criminal Defendant's Use of Peremptory Challenges.  13 UH L. Rev. 279 (1991).

 

Case Notes

 

  Where four joint defendants joined in each of ten challenges, held that they had exercised their full right of challenge, although each would have been allowed ten challenges if taken separately.  3 H. 90 (1869).

  Defendant allowed twelve peremptory challenges only when the charged offense itself carries penalty of life imprisonment.  65 H. 354, 652 P.2d 1119 (1982).

  Circuit court plainly erred where, during jury selection, it removed two jurors for cause on the motion of respondent after the jury panel already had been passed for cause, and defendant and respondent had already exhausted their peremptory challenges; this procedure violated rule 24 of the HRPP, which provides that challenges for cause may be made at any time prior to the exercise of peremptory challenges, and in effect abrogated the parity in the number of peremptories each side is guaranteed pursuant to this section.  127 H. 415, 279 P.3d 683 (2012).

 

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1982–2025 · leading case: State v. Ho, 279 P.3d 683 (Haw. 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Ho, 279 P.3d 683 (Haw. 2012). · cites it 48× “2 HRS § 635-30 (1993) provides: In criminal cases, if the offense charged is punishable by life imprisonment, each side is entitled to twelve peremptory challenges.”
State v. Morishige, 652 P.2d 1119 (Haw. 1982). · cites it 7× “Whether the trial court erred by not allowing defendant twelve peremptory juror challenges pursuant to Rule 24(b), Hawaii Rules of Penal Procedure (HRPP), and HRS § 635-30, since conviction of the offenses charged would have subjected defendant to life imprisonment under the…”
State v. Villeza, 942 P.2d 522 (Haw. 1997). · cites it 2× “HRS § 635-30 (1993). 13 . HRS § 635-29(1993).”
State v. Carvalho, 880 P.2d 217 (Haw. App. 1994). · cites it 2× “Moreover, once the State waived its challenge it was foreclosed from exercising any more peremptory challenges because the State is only “allowed as many peremptory challenges as are allowed to [the] defendant ].”
State v. Timas, 923 P.2d 916 (Haw. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “HRS § 635-30 (1993) and HRPP Rule 24(b) both provide that in all cases, the prosecution shall be allowed as many peremptory challenges as are allowed to all defendants.”
State v. Brewer (Haw. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “Brewer argues his waiver "was not knowing or intelligent because the Court did not inform him of his right to peremptory challenges as set forth in HRS § 635-30 and HRPP Rule 24(b)[.]" The Waiver of Trial by Jury that Brewer signed told him: 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S…”
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.