Case Notes

• Jurisdiction: Hawaii,United States
• Citation: Vol. 17 No. 05
• Publication year: 2013

CASE NOTES

Appeal Pointers

A circuit court order granting summary judgment or dismissing claims is not appealable unless it is reduced to a separate judgment. HRCP 58; Jenkins v. Cades Schutte Fleming & Wright, 76 Haw. 115, 869 P.2d 1334 (1994).

Supreme Court

Criminal

State v. Metcalfe, No. SCWC-30518, March 19, 2013 (Recktenwald, C.J., with Acoba, J. and Sakamoto, J. dissenting). Appellant was found guilty of manslaughter, based on, inter alia, the testimony of witnesses whose qualifications to provide expert opinion testimony were not provided. On appeal, Appellant argued that the circuit court erred in failing to properly qualify the expert witnesses. The Hawaii Supreme Court affirmed, concluding that the circuit court did not err in allowing the testimony of the expert witnesses, did not err in instructing the jury on self-defense, in failing to sua sponte instruct the jury on defense of property, or in failing to provide a cautionary instruction on the use of medical marijuana. Moreover, the Metcalfe court held that Appellant failed to establish that his trial counsel was ineffective.

Justice Acoba, joined by Circuit Judge Sakamoto, noted the parties set forth competing scenarios of the shooting. Respondent argued Decedent was shot in the back from at least forty feet, while Petitioner argued Decedent was shot while he was turning from a distance of less than fifteen feet.

Both Dr. Manoukian and Detective Ah Mow as state witnesses testified as to the distance between Petitioner and Decedent. Rendering such an opinion required expertise in the field of ballistics. Dr. Manoukian, an expert in forensic pathology, stated that he was not a ballistics expert. Detective Ah Mow had received training in the handling and maintaining of firearms, but did not indicate he was qualified to testify to the distance between Petitioner and Decedent.

Justice Acoba agreed it was permissible to refer to expert witnesses as opinion witnesses. However, the two opinion witnesses must still be identified either in court or in jury instructions as qualified to render an opinion and to do so in specified fields. The Hawai'i Rules of Evidence (HRE) Rule 702 Commentary states that the court's determination that "a witness qualifies as an expert is binding upon the trier of fact," that the trier of fact may then "consider the qualifications of the witness in determining the weight to be given to his testimony," and that an expert must be qualified in a particular field. The...