Recent Blog Posts

Abuse

Greg Jackson — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 20:19:00 GMT

There is no formula for approaching Abuse cases, and often the way forward is very fact specific. What comes out of the situation is basically typcially two cases happening at once. First is the criminal court Abuse / Assault case which happens in the Honolulu Court and second typically will follow the Temporary Restraining order (TRO) case in Family Court out in Kapolei.

The case gets even more complicated if the couple files a divorce and start battling for custody of any children that might be involved. Where this happens the TRO will become a major issue, and sometimes the concern about household safety temporarily will put the criminal case on the back burner. However, for the defendant the criminal case should never be far from their mind. The impact of a criminal conviction can be huge. Cases under HRS 709-906 can carry a mandatory minimum jail time and are not deferrment eligible. If the Defendant is employed by the military, or holds some other job where carrying a firearm, gun or other kind of weapon, a conviction for domestic abuse (defined extremely broadly) the federal Lautenberg Amendment can jeopardize their career since they're no longer allowed to carry a weapon.

Not always, but sometimes the state will pursue a case in which the complaining witness (i.e. "victim") and the Defendant or Accused are already back together. Of course, this isn't a bad thing. There are victims out there who lack the perspective to know when they face an extremely dangerous situation. However, other times the court involvement marks an interruption in what is otherwise a very healthy relationship.

Knowing how to recognize these situations, and being able to maintain perspective is where the attorneys come in. Sometimes agreeing to a stipulated protective order avoids the finding of fact in the TRO case that can strengthen the state's criminal case. Sometimes a delay in the TRO hearing, no matter how painful because it limits access to children, is in the client's best interest. On the criminal side, it's impossible to predict what evidence the state has before getting discovery. And therefore it's nearly impossible to advise on your client's best course other than speaking generally about the various routes the case might take. Things to consider, the extent of injury to the parties, the contents of the statements, whether the defendant has made a statement, whether there were witnesses to the alleged assault, whether there is evidence of a mutual affray, or whether the case was perely pushing and shoving. Whether the defendant has a criminal record. Whether there are other mitigating factors to consider, whether the couple is reconciled, what the family situation is like at present. All of this needs to be considered.

Whatever the reason, the economy, the weather, or just stress, it seems like more of these cases are appearing lately. If you need any assistance with any legal matters, including TROs and/or domestic abuse, you should feel free to contact us.

DUI - Roadblocks

Greg Jackson — Fri, 06 Aug 2010 22:02:00 GMT

DUI Road Blocks have been in the news a lot lately because of HPD's investigation into some of the police sergeants and officers who run them. Apparently there are possible allegations of misconduct in regards to who was at the DUI roadblock and when, and whether reality matches up with what was reported on paper. However this shakes out in the end, the current is good news for some defendants who have recently been accused of driving under the influence. The fact of the investigation brings into questioon the credibility of those state witnesess. As a result people who had those officers involved in their DUI or traffic stop may be able to avoid prosecution.

Something that has not been in the news lately, but also is in regards to DUI road blocks is the fact that some certain DUI roadblocks are not being run in compliance with the statute. 291E-20 requires that the a DUI roadblock or DUI checkpoint be conducted for no longer than a maximum of 3 hours. If the road block is run for longer than that, the Defendant may be able to argue that the evidence collected at the road block, i.e. the standardized field sobriety test (SFST) results, and statements that "I have a few glasses of wine with dinner" or "I had a few beers at the club" as well as even the intoxilizer or breathylizer results collected back at the police station should all be excluded. This argument has been successful recently, and should continue to be successful in future cases--at least with the one judge who ruled against the prosecutor.

Lastly, some people may have heard of the recent State v. Wheeler decision that dismissed a number of DUI / OVUII cases because the Criminal Compaint failed to state an essential element of the crime of DUI, specifically that the Criminal Complaint failed to state that the offense happened on a public street or roadway. When this decision came down a number of active cases were dismissed without prejudice, meaning that the state was at leave to file new complaints that included the essential language. There are at least two Rule 40, Hawaii Rule of Penal Procedure, petitions that I'm aware of pending in District Court to overturn prior covictions where the Deputy Prosecutor's criminal complaint (whether it was written or oral) failed to use the essential language. We have yet to be seen whether this argument will be successful, and also what it would do to the state's decision to prosecute those cases again. I'll try to keep this blog updated on the results of the pending petitions.

Welcome to our Criminal Defense Blog

Criminal Defense Attorney — Fri, 02 Jul 2010 23:40:00 GMT

Our attorneys are pleased to announce the launch of our criminal defense blog with an RSS feed available at http://www.hawaiicriminaldefenselaw.com/Blog/Recent-Blog-Posts/RSS.xml