Case Notes

• Publication year: 2015

CASE NOTES

Supreme Court

Criminal

State v. Deguiar, No. SCWC-11-0000573, September 17, 2015, (Recktenwald, C.J.). This case arose from the murder of Jermaine Duckworth. On April 9, 2008, Appellant was indicted for Duckworth's murder and kidnapping, as well as firearms charges and other offenses. In two separate trials, the State attempted to prove that Appellant was the individual who shot and killed Duckworth. Both trials ended in mistrial. In the second trial, Appellant was tried on Counts I through IV only. The jury indicated that it could not reach a verdict on Counts I, III, and IV, and the circuit court declared a mistrial on those counts. Although the jury appeared to reach a unanimous verdict of guilty on Count II, the circuit court concluded that the jury's failure to reach a unanimous result on a related interrogatory meant that the jury was in fact hung on Count II, and so the circuit court declared a mistrial on that count as well. The circuit court discharged the jury. Later that night, the circuit court concluded that it had erred by not accepting the verdict on Count II. The circuit court reconvened the jurors eight days later, questioned them regarding their votes, and accepted the guilty verdict as to Count II. Shortly thereafter, a juror contacted the circuit court regarding possible misconduct by the jurors during the trial. After questioning all twelve jurors, the circuit court determined that the jury deliberations had been tainted by juror misconduct. The circuit court granted Appellant's motion to dismiss Counts I, III, and IV under State v. Moriwake, 65 Haw. 47, 647 P.2d 705 (1982). The circuit court also granted Appellant's motion to vacate Count II based on the juror misconduct but denied his motions to dismiss Count II under Moriwake. Instead, the circuit court ordered a retrial on Count II. In addition, the circuit court rejected Appellant's objections to recalling the jury. On appeal, the Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA) affirmed the circuit court's orders on Counts I through IV. The Hawaii Supreme Court also affirmed.

Appeal Pointers

11. A motion filed in the appellate court may be summarily denied without prejudice if the motion is not accompanied by proof that the motion was served on all parties at or before the time of filing. HRAP 25(b), 25(d), 27(a).

Torts

Ngo v. The Queen's Medical Ctr., No. SCWC-30172, August 31, 2015, (McKenna, J.). At issue in this appeal was the extent of a plaintiff's burden of presenting...