Haw. Rev. Stat. » Haw. Rev. Stat. / Chapter 702
Hawaii Revised Statutes

Haw. Rev. Stat. § 702-209 (2026)

  Conditional intent

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

     §702-209  Conditional intent.  When a particular intent is necessary to establish an element of an offense, it is immaterial that such intent was conditional unless the condition negatives the harm or evil sought to be prevented by the law prohibiting the offense. [L 1972, c 9, pt of §1]

 

COMMENTARY ON §702-209

 

  This section provides that when the law requires that a particular intent is necessary to establish an element of an offense, that intent is established notwithstanding its conditional nature, unless the condition negatives the harm or evil sought to be prevented.  The section provides for a common sense result, and the cases in which the condition negatives the harm or evil sought to be prevented will not be many; nevertheless the distinction should be stated.

  The section can best be illustrated by example.  A person accused of burglary would not be excused because the person intended to steal only if no one else was in the building, whereas a person charged with attempted rape, predicated on a preliminary assault, would be excused of that offense if the person intended to effect sexual intercourse only if the mature victim consented.  In the latter case, however, the person would, most likely, be guilty of an assault.

 

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1997–2024 · leading case: State v. Palisbo, 3 P.3d 510 (Haw. App. 2000).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Palisbo, 3 P.3d 510 (Haw. App. 2000). · cites it 10× “HRS § 702-209. [(Instruction 2) 15 ] 4. If you should find that the accused engaged in the prohibited conduct under ignorance or mistake of fact and that mistake negates the state of mind required to establish an element of the offense, you must vote for acquittal of the accused.”
Holloway v. United States, 526 U.S. 1 (1999). · cites it 2× “11, § 254 (1995); Haw. Rev. Stat. § 702-209 (1993); 18 Pa. Cons.”
United States v. Teddy Arnold Charles Robinson Darrel Jones David Valentine Paul Scaglione & Jeffrey Drake, Francois Holloway A/K/A Abdu Ali, 126 F.3d 82 (2d Cir. 1997). “, Haw.Rev.Stat. § 702-209 (1993) (“When a particular intent is necessary to establish an element of an offense, it is immaterial that such intent was conditional unless the condition negatives the harm or evil sought to be prevented by the law prohibiting the offense.”
United States v. Angelo Stackhouse, 105 F.4th 1193 (9th Cir. 2024). “STACKHOUSE similar language to the MPC); Haw. Rev. Stat. § 702-209 (same); 18 Pa. Stat.”
State v. Keawemauhili, 157 P.3d 539 (Haw. App. 2007). “§ 702-209 Conditional intent. When a particular intent is necessary to establish an element of an offense, it is immaterial that such intent was conditional unless the condition negatives the harm or evil sought to be prevented by the law prohibiting the offense.”
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.