§707-764 Extortion. A person commits
extortion if the person does any of the following:
(1) Obtains, or exerts control over, the property,
labor, or services of another with intent to deprive another of property,
labor, or services by threatening by word or conduct to:
(a) Cause bodily injury in the future to the
person threatened or to any other person;
(b) Cause damage to property or cause damage,
as defined in section 708-890, to a computer, computer system, or computer
network;
(c) Subject the person threatened or any
other person to physical confinement or restraint;
(d) Commit a penal offense;
(e) Accuse some person of any offense or
cause a penal charge to be instituted against some person;
(f) Expose a secret or publicize an asserted
fact, whether true or false, tending to subject some person to hatred,
contempt, or ridicule, or to impair the threatened person's credit or business
repute;
(g) Reveal any information sought to be
concealed by the person threatened or any other person;
(h) Testify or provide information or
withhold testimony or information with respect to another's legal claim or
defense;
(i) Take or withhold action as a public
servant, or cause a public servant to take or withhold such action;
(j) Bring about or continue a strike,
boycott, or other similar collective action, to obtain property that is not
demanded or received for the benefit of the group that the defendant purports
to represent;
(k) Destroy, conceal, remove, confiscate, or
possess any actual or purported passport, or any other actual or purported
government identification document, or other immigration document, of another
person; or
(l) Do any other act that would not in itself
substantially benefit the defendant but that is calculated to harm
substantially some person with respect to the threatened person's health,
safety, business, calling, career, financial condition, reputation, or personal
relationships;
(2) Intentionally compels or induces another person
to engage in conduct from which another has a legal right to abstain or to
abstain from conduct in which another has a legal right to engage by
threatening by word or conduct to do any of the actions set forth in paragraph
(1)(a) through (l); or
(3) Makes or finances any extortionate extension of
credit, or collects any extension of credit by extortionate means. [L 1979, c
106, pt of §1; am L 2001, c 33, §3; am L 2008, c 147, §4]
Case Notes
In RICO action, plaintiff did not satisfy essential element
of extortion and failed to establish attempted extortion regarding defendant's
letter to plaintiff. 855 F. Supp. 1156 (1994).
Court found that plaintiff, a condominium owner, did not
present sufficient evidence to create a triable issue of fact as to the intent
requirement for a racketeering claim. Even if there was sufficient evidence to
create a genuine issue of fact as to whether defendants substantially harmed
plaintiff's health, financial condition, or reputation, plaintiff's civil
racketeering claim based on alleged extortion also required that defendants
obtain or exert control of plaintiff's property with the intent to deprive
plaintiff of property by threatening word or conduct. 185 F. Supp. 3d 1247
(2016).
"Legal right to abstain" as an essential component
of the offense under subsection (2). 63 H. 105, 621 P.2d 381 (1980).
Substantial direct and circumstantial evidence existed from
which jury could have convicted defendant of theft in the first degree by
extortion. 64 H. 65, 637 P.2d 407 (1981).
Elements of crime established even though victim did not drop
criminal charges against the defendant. 70 H. 245, 768 P.2d 239 (1989).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
14
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1980–2025 · leading case:
State v. Merino, 915 P.2d 672 (Haw. 1996).
State v. Merino, 915 P.2d 672 (Haw. 1996).
· cites it 6× “At the same time, HRS § 707-764, also enacted in 1979, 1979 Haw.”
State v. Pudiquet, 922 P.2d 1032 (Haw. App. 1996).
· cites it 10× “This particular instruction tracks the language of HRS § 707-764(1), 10 the extortion *428 statute.”
Derosa v. Ass'n of Apt. Owners of the Golf Villas, 185 F. Supp. 3d 1247 (D. Haw. 2016).
· cites it 2× “Section 707-764 states, in pertinent part: A person commits extortion if the person does any of the following: (1) Obtains, or exerts control over, the property, labor, or services of another with intent to deprive another of property, labor, or services by threatening by word…”
State v. Pukahi, 776 P.2d 392 (Haw. 1989).
· cites it 4× “*457 HRS § 707-764(1 )(a) reads as follows: Extortion.”
State v. Pineda, 768 P.2d 239 (Haw. 1989).
· cites it 8× “5 HRS § 707-764, in relevant part, reads: Extortion.”
Huihui v. Shimoda, 644 P.2d 968 (Haw. 1982).
· cites it 2× “1981) and two counts of extortion in the second degree, a class C felony under HRS § 707-764(l)(a) (Supp. 1981). Following a hearing on the government’s motion to commit petitioner without bail, the first circuit court denied petitioner bail under HRS § 804-3(b)(3) because it…”
Streck v. Peters, 855 F. Supp. 1156 (D. Haw. 1994).
· cites it 5× “by threatening by word or conduct to” cause bodily injury to a person or cause damage to property.”
State v. Brighter, 621 P.2d 381 (Haw. 1980).
· cites it 4× “The defendant was indicted under penal code provisions identical to HRS § 705-500 (1976) and HRS §, 707-724(l)(a) and (b) (1976) (current version at HRS § 707-764(2) (Supp. 1979)). HRS § 705-500 (1976) provides in pertinent part: (1) A person is guilty of an attempt to commit a…”
State v. Martin, 79 P.3d 686 (Haw. App. 2003).
· cites it 2× “” The Indictment was more specific than required by this statute. The Indictment charged that Martin acted “with intent to deprive, obtain or exert control over the property or services of [Caberto.”
State v. Soto, 627 P.2d 279 (Haw. 1981).
“Of a multiple-count indictment against the defendant-appellee Michael Roy Soto, we need only to deal with Count VII, extortion, § 707-764(2) and § 707-768, Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) (Supp.”
Nicol v. Ka'anapali Golf Estates Cmty. Ass'n, Inc. (D. Haw. 2021).
· cites it 18× “HRS § 707-764 defines “extortion” as “[o]btain[ing], or exert[ing] control over, the property, labor, or services of another with intent to deprive another of property, labor, or services by threatening by word or conduct to” engage in at least one of a number of acts specified…”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 707-764(1) — 5 cases
State v. Pudiquet, 922 P.2d 1032 (Haw. App. 1996).
“This particular instruction tracks the language of HRS § 707-764(1), 10 the extortion *428 statute.”
State v. Martin, 79 P.3d 686 (Haw. App. 2003).
“” The Indictment was more specific than required by this statute. The Indictment charged that Martin acted “with intent to deprive, obtain or exert control over the property or services of [Caberto.”
Streck v. Peters, 855 F. Supp. 1156 (D. Haw. 1994).
“by threatening by word or conduct to” cause bodily injury to a person or cause damage to property.”
State v. Pineda, 768 P.2d 239 (Haw. 1989).
“5 HRS § 707-764, in relevant part, reads: Extortion.”
Nicol v. Ka'anapali Golf Estates Cmty. Ass'n, Inc. (D. Haw. 2021).
“HRS § 707-764 defines “extortion” as “[o]btain[ing], or exert[ing] control over, the property, labor, or services of another with intent to deprive another of property, labor, or services by threatening by word or conduct to” engage in at least one of a number of acts specified…”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 707-764(1)(1) — 1 case
Nicol v. Ka'anapali Golf Estates Cmty. Ass'n, Inc. (D. Haw. 2021).
“HRS § 707-764 defines “extortion” as “[o]btain[ing], or exert[ing] control over, the property, labor, or services of another with intent to deprive another of property, labor, or services by threatening by word or conduct to” engage in at least one of a number of acts specified…”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 707-764(1)(a) — 2 cases
Streck v. Peters, 855 F. Supp. 1156 (D. Haw. 1994).
“by threatening by word or conduct to” cause bodily injury to a person or cause damage to property.”
Nicol v. Ka'anapali Golf Estates Cmty. Ass'n, Inc. (D. Haw. 2021).
“HRS § 707-764 defines “extortion” as “[o]btain[ing], or exert[ing] control over, the property, labor, or services of another with intent to deprive another of property, labor, or services by threatening by word or conduct to” engage in at least one of a number of acts specified…”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 707-764(1)(l) — 2 cases
Nicol v. Ka'anapali Golf Estates Cmty. Ass'n, Inc. (D. Haw. 2021).
“HRS § 707-764 defines “extortion” as “[o]btain[ing], or exert[ing] control over, the property, labor, or services of another with intent to deprive another of property, labor, or services by threatening by word or conduct to” engage in at least one of a number of acts specified…”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 707-764(2) — 4 cases
Derosa v. Ass'n of Apt. Owners of the Golf Villas, 185 F. Supp. 3d 1247 (D. Haw. 2016).
“Section 707-764 states, in pertinent part: A person commits extortion if the person does any of the following: (1) Obtains, or exerts control over, the property, labor, or services of another with intent to deprive another of property, labor, or services by threatening by word…”
State v. Brighter, 621 P.2d 381 (Haw. 1980).
“The defendant was indicted under penal code provisions identical to HRS § 705-500 (1976) and HRS §, 707-724(l)(a) and (b) (1976) (current version at HRS § 707-764(2) (Supp. 1979)). HRS § 705-500 (1976) provides in pertinent part: (1) A person is guilty of an attempt to commit a…”
State v. Pineda, 768 P.2d 239 (Haw. 1989).
“5 HRS § 707-764, in relevant part, reads: Extortion.”
State v. Soto, 627 P.2d 279 (Haw. 1981).
“Of a multiple-count indictment against the defendant-appellee Michael Roy Soto, we need only to deal with Count VII, extortion, § 707-764(2) and § 707-768, Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) (Supp.”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 707-764(l)(a) — 3 cases
Huihui v. Shimoda, 644 P.2d 968 (Haw. 1982).
“1981) and two counts of extortion in the second degree, a class C felony under HRS § 707-764(l)(a) (Supp. 1981). Following a hearing on the government’s motion to commit petitioner without bail, the first circuit court denied petitioner bail under HRS § 804-3(b)(3) because it…”
State v. Pudiquet, 922 P.2d 1032 (Haw. App. 1996).
“This particular instruction tracks the language of HRS § 707-764(1), 10 the extortion *428 statute.”
State v. Pukahi, 776 P.2d 392 (Haw. 1989).
“*457 HRS § 707-764(1 )(a) reads as follows: Extortion.”
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.