Hawaii Revised Statutes

Haw. Rev. Stat. § 801-2 (2026)

  Witnesses; defense

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

     §801-2  Witnesses; defense.  In the trial of any person on the charge of any offense, he shall have a right to meet the witnesses, who are produced against him, face to face; to produce witnesses and proofs in his own favor; and by himself or his counsel, to examine the witnesses produced by himself, and cross-examine those produced against him; and to be heard in his defense. [PC 1869, c 2, §3; RL 1925, §3932; RL 1935, §5355; RL 1945, §10686; RL 1955, §253-6; HRS §705-6; ren L 1972, c 9, pt of §1]

 

Cross References

 

  See Const. art. I, §14.

 

Rules of Court

 

  Presence of defendant, see HRPP rule 43.

  Depositions, discovery and inspection, subpoenas, see HRPP rules 15, 16, 17.

  Applicability of rules, see HRPP rules 1, 54.

 

Case Notes

 

  Confrontation may be waived.  33 F.2d 396 (1929); 23 H. 421, 423 (1916); 37 H. 477 (1947).

  Cross-examination, within discretion of trial court.  34 F.2d 86 (1929); 39 H. 635 (1953).

  Constitutional privilege of being confronted by one's accusers includes knowing what they are saying.  7 H. 319 (1888).

  When a party fails to avail himself of the opportunity to cross-examine, he forfeits such right.  44 H. 82, 352 P.2d 611 (1960).

  No reversal for error in restricting cross-examination unless the error was prejudicial.  47 H. 185, 389 P.2d 146 (1963).

  Where defendant's response to the circuit court during the ultimate Tachibana colloquy indicated that he did not understand his right to testify, and the court did not engage in an exchange that adequately established, on the record, defendant's understanding of that right, the record was insufficient to support a determination that defendant's waiver of the right to testify was knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily made.  140 H. 421, 402 P.3d 497 (2017).

  Defendant's constitutional and statutory right to testify in defendant's own defense was violated where judge reproached defendant to follow defendant's attorney's advice and thus refrain from testifying.  78 H. 115 (App.), 890 P.2d 702 (1995).

  See 7 H. 319 (1888); 12 H. 189 (1899).

  Cited:  134 H. 361, 341 P.3d 567 (2014).

 

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases, 1995–2018 · leading case: Tachibana v. State, 900 P.2d 1293 (Haw. 1995).
Tachibana v. State, 900 P.2d 1293 (Haw. 1995). · cites it 4× “HRS § 801-2 (1985) states: *1299 In the trial of any person on the charge of any offense, he [or she] shall have a right .”
State v. Schnabel., 279 P.3d 1237 (Haw. 2012). · cites it 4× “Because the texts of sections 5, 14, and 10 of article I of the Hawai#i Constitution parallel the fourteenth, fifth, and sixth amendments to the United States Constitution, . . . the right to testify is also guaranteed by these parallel provisions of the Hawai#i Constitution.”
State v. Mattson, 226 P.3d 482 (Haw. 2010). · cites it 4× “Additionally, HRS § 801-2 (1993) protects the right of confrontation and the right to testify: In the trial of any person on the charge of any offense, he shall have a right to meet the witnesses, who are produced against him, face to face; to produce witnesses and proofs in his…”
State v. Celestine., 415 P.3d 907 (Haw. 2018). · cites it 2× “The right to testify is guaranteed by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the United States Constitution; the Hawai'i Constitution's parallel guarantees under article I, sections 5, 10, and 14; and HRS § 801-2. State v. Pomroy , 132 Hawai'i 85 , 91, 319 P.”
State v. Chong Hung Han, 306 P.3d 128 (Haw. 2013). · cites it 2× “For the purposes of this section, "family or household member” means spouses or reciprocal beneficiaries, former spouses or reciprocal beneficiaries, persons who have a child in common, parents, children; persons related by consanguinity, and persons jointly residing or formerly…”
State v. Monteil., 341 P.3d 567 (Haw. 2014). · cites it 2× “A defendant’s “right to testify is guaranteed by the United States’ Sixth Amendment guarantee of compulsory process, and Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of due process; the Hawai'i Constitution’s parallel guarantees under Article I, sections 14, and 5, respectively; and HRS §…”
State v. Pomroy., 319 P.3d 1093 (Haw. 2014). · cites it 2× “We first noted that the right to testify is guaranteed by the United States Constitution’s Fifth Amendment guarantee against compelled testimony, Sixth Amendment guarantee of compulsory process, and Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of due process; the Hawai'i Constitution’s…”
State v. Silva, 890 P.2d 702 (Haw. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “HRS § 801-2 (1985) states: In the trial of any person on the charge of any offense, he shall have a right to meet the witnesses, who are produced against him, face to face; to produce witnesses and proofs in his own favor; and by himself or his counsel, to examine the witness…”
State v. Kim., 402 P.3d 497 (Haw. 2017). · cites it 4× “The right to testify is guaranteed by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the United States Constitution; article I, sections 5, 10, and 14 of the Hawaiʻi Constitution; and HRS § 801-2 (1993). State v. Pomroy, 132 Hawaiʻi 85, 91, 319 P.”
State v. Eduwensuyi., 141 Haw. 328 (Haw. 2018). · cites it 2× “The right to testify is guaranteed by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the United States Constitution; parallel provisions contained in article I, sections 5, 10, and 14 of the Hawaii Constitution; and HRS § 801-2. State v. Pomroy, 132 Hawaii 85, 91, 319 P.”
State v. Christian, 967 P.2d 239 (Haw. 1998). · cites it 2× “Because the texts of sections 5, 14, and 10 of article I of the Hawai'i Constitution parallel the fourteenth, fifth, and sixth amendments to the United States Constitution, .”
Inoue v. Inoue, 185 P.3d 834 (Haw. App. 2008). “” Bowman at § 801-2. Moreover, Gina attempted to introduce her prior statements “for the truth of the matter asserted,” i.”
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.