§710-1022 Promoting prison contraband in
the first degree. (1) A person commits the offense of promoting prison
contraband in the first degree if:
(a) The person intentionally conveys a dangerous
instrument or drug to any person confined in a correctional or detention
facility; or
(b) Being a person confined in a correctional or
detention facility, the person intentionally makes, obtains, or possesses a
dangerous instrument or drug.
(2) A "dangerous instrument" shall
have the same meaning as defined in section 707-700; a dangerous instrument may
only be possessed by or conveyed to a confined person with the facility
administrator's express prior approval. A "drug" shall include
dangerous drugs, detrimental drugs, harmful drugs, intoxicating compounds,
marijuana, and marijuana concentrates as listed in section 712-1240; a drug may
only be possessed by or conveyed to a confined person with the facility
administrator's express prior approval and under medical supervision.
(3) Promoting prison contraband in the first
degree is a class B felony. [L 1972, c 9, pt of §1; am L 1976, c 99, §1; am L
1986, c 339, §79; gen ch 1993]
Case Notes
As suspect classification or fundamental right was not
involved, and based upon dissimilar statutory treatment generally accorded to
possession of marijuana as opposed to alcohol, where there was a rational basis
for dissimilar punishment, section did not violate defendant's equal protection
right because it imposed a more severe penalty for marijuana possession than
for alcohol possession under §710-1023. 92 H. 217 (App.), 990 P.2d 115 (1999).
Section 710-1023(1)(b) (1993) is a lesser included offense of
subsection (1)(b). 92 H. 217 (App.), 990 P.2d 115 (1999).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
8
cases, 1982–2010 · leading case:
State v. Hatori, 990 P.2d 115 (Haw. App. 1999).
State v. Hatori, 990 P.2d 115 (Haw. App. 1999).
· cites it 40× “Second, Defendant argues that HRS § 710-1022 violates his constitutional right to equal protection under the law.”
State v. Rapozo, 235 P.3d 325 (Haw. 2010).
· cites it 4× “The State further argued that Rapozo had passively attempted to bring "live" ammunition into the police station holding facility, where she or another detainee could have used a "home made" gun or found some other means of discharging the bullet, and that she could have been…”
State v. Maugaotega, 114 P.3d 905 (Haw. 2005).
· cites it 2× “03-1-2727, charging him with the one count of promoting prison contraband, in violation of HRS § 710-1022(1)(b) (1993). On March 8, 2004, Maugaotega entered a no contest plea to the charge.”
State v. Alvey, 678 P.2d 5 (Haw. 1984).
· cites it 2× “” HRS § 710-1022(l)(b) (1976). 3 One problem with this case is that it is not clear whether the prison disciplinary committee is an administrative or a judicial body.”
State v. Bayaoa, 656 P.2d 1330 (Haw. 1982).
· cites it 2× “This motion was denied, and appellant was subsequently found guilty of violating HRS § 710-1022, promoting prison contraband in the first degree.”
State v. Paaaina, 689 P.2d 754 (Haw. 1984).
“On September 21, 1981, defendant Todd Avery Paaaina (Paaaina), was indicted for Promoting Prison Contraband in the First Degree, in violation of Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 710-1022(l)(b) (1976). After a jury trial, Paaaina was Found guilty as charged.”
State v. Schmidt, 774 P.2d 242 (Haw. 1989).
“Subsequently, on February 21, 1988, Defendant Marion Schmidt was indicted by the Kauai Grand Jury for Promoting Prison Contraband in the First Degree in violation of Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 710-1022(l)(b). Defendant moved to dismiss the indictmenton May 9, 1988 on the…”
State v. Maugaotega (Haw. App. 2010).
· cites it 3× “03-1-2727, the circuit court entered an Amended Judgment after Maugaotega entered a no contest plea to Promoting Prison Contraband in the First Degree, in violation of HRS § 710-1022(1)(b) (1993). The Amended Judgment sets forth the wrong HRS statute (§ 134-6); the circuit court…”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 710-1022(1)(b) — 2 cases
State v. Maugaotega, 114 P.3d 905 (Haw. 2005).
“03-1-2727, charging him with the one count of promoting prison contraband, in violation of HRS § 710-1022(1)(b) (1993). On March 8, 2004, Maugaotega entered a no contest plea to the charge.”
State v. Maugaotega (Haw. App. 2010).
“03-1-2727, the circuit court entered an Amended Judgment after Maugaotega entered a no contest plea to Promoting Prison Contraband in the First Degree, in violation of HRS § 710-1022(1)(b) (1993). The Amended Judgment sets forth the wrong HRS statute (§ 134-6); the circuit court…”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 710-1022(2) — 1 case
State v. Hatori, 990 P.2d 115 (Haw. App. 1999).
“Second, Defendant argues that HRS § 710-1022 violates his constitutional right to equal protection under the law.”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 710-1022(2)(b) — 1 case
State v. Hatori, 990 P.2d 115 (Haw. App. 1999).
“Second, Defendant argues that HRS § 710-1022 violates his constitutional right to equal protection under the law.”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 710-1022(l)(b) — 4 cases
State v. Hatori, 990 P.2d 115 (Haw. App. 1999).
“Second, Defendant argues that HRS § 710-1022 violates his constitutional right to equal protection under the law.”
State v. Alvey, 678 P.2d 5 (Haw. 1984).
“” HRS § 710-1022(l)(b) (1976). 3 One problem with this case is that it is not clear whether the prison disciplinary committee is an administrative or a judicial body.”
State v. Paaaina, 689 P.2d 754 (Haw. 1984).
“On September 21, 1981, defendant Todd Avery Paaaina (Paaaina), was indicted for Promoting Prison Contraband in the First Degree, in violation of Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 710-1022(l)(b) (1976). After a jury trial, Paaaina was Found guilty as charged.”
State v. Schmidt, 774 P.2d 242 (Haw. 1989).
“Subsequently, on February 21, 1988, Defendant Marion Schmidt was indicted by the Kauai Grand Jury for Promoting Prison Contraband in the First Degree in violation of Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 710-1022(l)(b). Defendant moved to dismiss the indictmenton May 9, 1988 on the…”
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.