From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Long

Supreme Court of Hawaii
Jan 31, 2003
24992 (Haw. Jan. 31, 2003)

Opinion

24992

January 31, 2003.

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT (HPD NO. 02048654)

Jon N. Ikenaga, Deputy Public Defender, for defendant-appellant Daniel H. Shimizu, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, for plaintiff-appellee

MOON, C.J., LEVINSON, NAKAYAMA, JJ., and INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS CHIEF JUDGE BURNS, ASSIGNED BY REASON OF VACANCY; ACOBA, J., DISSENTING


SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER

Defendant-appellant Dewitt Lamar Long appeals from the judgment of conviction and sentence of the District Court of the First Circuit, the Honorable Leslie A. Hayashi presiding, adjudging him guilty of harassment, in violation of Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) § 711-1106(1)(a) (Supp. 2001). On appeal, the defense alleges that: (1) the trial court failed to advise Long of his right to testify pursuant to Tachibana v. State, 79 Haw. 226, 900 P.2d 1293 (1995) and (2) the prosecution failed to adduce sufficient evidence that Long (a) acted with the intent to harass, annoy, or alarm and (b) subjected the complaining witness to offensive physical contact.

HRS § 711-1106(1)(a) provides that "[a] person commits the offense of harassment if, with intent to harass, annoy, or alarm any other person, that person . . . [s]trikes, shoves, kicks, or otherwise touches another person in an offensive manner or subjects the other person to offensive physical contact[.]"

Upon carefully reviewing the record and the briefs submitted by the parties and having given due consideration to the arguments advanced, the issues raised, and the controlling authority, we hold that: (1) the alleged violation of the colloquy requirement did not affect Long's substantial rights, cf. Tachibana, 79 Hawai`i at 240, 900 P.2d at 1307; State v. Staley, 91 Haw. 275, 982 P.2d 904 (1999) (holding trial court committed plain error when it relied on representations of defense counsel regarding defendant's election to not testify); and (2) the complaining witness's testimony established sufficient evidence of intent to harass, annoy, or alarm and of offensive physical contact, see State v. Batson, 73 Haw. 236, 254, 831 P.2d 924, 934 (1992); State v. Jhun, 83 Hawai`` 472, 481, 927 P.2d 1355, 1364 (1996). Therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the January 16, 2002 judgment of conviction and sentence from which this appeal is taken is affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Long

Supreme Court of Hawaii
Jan 31, 2003
24992 (Haw. Jan. 31, 2003)
Case details for

State v. Long

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF HAWAI`I, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DEWITT LAMAR LONG…

Court:Supreme Court of Hawaii

Date published: Jan 31, 2003

Citations

24992 (Haw. Jan. 31, 2003)