Opinion
NO. CAAP-15-0000587
02-08-2016
STATE OF HAWAI'I, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. HESELOMI V. AHOKOVI and AHOKOVI-LIZARES MOTORCARS, LLC, Defendants-Appellants
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI'I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT
(CASE NO. 3DCW-13-0001805)
ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL
(By: Nakamura, C.J., and Fujise and Reifurth, JJ.)
Upon review of the record in CAAP-15-0000587, it appears that we lack appellate jurisdiction over Defendants-Appellants Heselomi V. Ahokovi and Ahokovi-Lizares Motorcars, LLC's (Appellants) appeal from the (1) Court's Decision Re: Restitution, filed on January 22, 2015, (2) Amended Order and Notice of Entry of Order, filed on February 26, 2015, and (3) Order Imposing Restitution as Additional Condition of DANC Orders Filed June 26, 2014; Findings of Fact; Conclusions of Law; and Order, filed on June 23, 2015 in the District Court of the Third Circuit (collectively, the Restitution Orders).
Appellants purport to appeal pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 641-12. "The right to an appeal is strictly statutory." State v. Ontiveros, 82 Hawai'i 446, 449, 923 P.2d 388, 391 (1996) (citation omitted). "Appeals upon the record shall be allowed from all final decisions and final judgments of district courts in all criminal matters. Such appeals may be made to the intermediate appellate court, subject to chapter 602, whenever the party appealing shall file notice of the party's appeal within thirty days, or such other time as may be provided by the rules of the court." HRS § 641-12.
Appellants' citation to HRS § 641-1 and § 641-2 in their Notice of Appeal is in error as Appellants apparently acknowledge in their September 10, 2015 jurisdictional statement.
However, none of the Restitution Orders are final, insofar as none of them, nor all of them collectively, serve to resolve the case. Therefore, none of them individually or collectively, qualify as an appealable order for the purpose of HRS § 641-12.
We note that Appellants have also filed petitions for mandamus challenging the Restitution Orders in SCPW-15-0000358 and SCPW-15-0000509, which remain pending decision by the Hawai'i Supreme Court.
--------
The District Court granted Appellants a deferred acceptance of no contest plea. Therefore, Appellants may not appeal pursuant to HRS § 641-12 and this court lacks appellate jurisdiction over the appeal. See State v. Kealaiki, 95 Hawai'i 309, 311-12, 22 P.3d 588, 590-91 (2001).
Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, February 8, 2016.
/s/
Chief Judge
/s/
Associate Judge
/s/
Associate Judge