§706-622 Requirement of probation;
exception. When a person who has been convicted of a felony is not
sentenced to imprisonment, the court shall place the person on probation.
Nothing in this part shall prohibit the court from suspending any sentence
imposed upon persons convicted of a crime other than a felony. [L 1972, c 9, pt
of §1; am L 1986, c 314, §23; gen ch 1992]
COMMENTARY ON §706-622
Once the decision has been made to withhold a sentence of
imprisonment, some criteria must be stated for choosing between suspending
sentence and sentencing the defendant to probation. The Code favors placing
the defendant on probation if the defendant needs "the supervision,
guidance, assistance, or direction that the probation service can
provide." In the case of defendants convicted of serious crimes,
probation will be the usual sentence (if imprisonment is withheld). For those
defendants convicted of minor crimes (especially first offenders), a suspended
sentence may suffice.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
6
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1978–2022 · leading case:
State v. Rivera, 102 P.3d 1044 (Haw. 2004).
State v. Rivera, 102 P.3d 1044 (Haw. 2004).
· cites it 8× “2003), [9] a suspended sentence, HRS § 706-622 (1993), [10] and imprisonment, e.”
State v. Fields, 686 P.2d 1379 (Haw. 1984).
· cites it 4× “After convicting Shirley Lynn Fields of three counts of Promoting a Dangerous Drug and finding she was "in need of the supervision, guidance, assistance, or direction that the probation service can provide," HRS § 706-622, the circuit court released her into the community under…”
State v. Ortez, 588 P.2d 898 (Haw. 1978).
· cites it 2× “Provision is made by the HPC for departure in sentencing from the established norms, by a grant of discretion to the sentencing court to impose extended term sentences under the standards defined by HRS § 706-622. In State v. Huelsman, 60 Haw.”
State v. Asuncion, 205 P.3d 577 (Haw. App. 2009).
· cites it 2× “HRS § 706-622, entitled "Requirement of probation; exception[,]” provides that "[w]hen a person who has been convicted of a felony is not sentenced to imprisonment, the court shall place the person on probation.”
State v. Canosa, 508 P.3d 1216 (Haw. App. 2022).
· cites it 2× “Further, Canosa provides no relevant authority for this new argument, essentially that the Circuit Court committed plain error by not requiring the State to convene a new jury during the 2020 resentencing to prove the facts necessary for extended sentencing under HRS § 706-622…”
State v. Grindling, 226 P.3d 522 (Haw. App. 2010).
· cites it 2× “(a) For a defendant to be eligible for probation under HRS § 706-622. 5 (Supp. 2008), the court must first determine the defendant is non-violent after reviewing the defendant's criminal history and other relevant information.”
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.