State v. Martinez

22 Citing cases

  1. State v. Kalili

    150 Haw. 219 (Haw. Ct. App. 2021)

    When there is properly admitted expert testimony with respect to Battered Child Syndrome, a child decedent's prior injuries could be admissible to show intentional infliction or lack of accident of the fatal injury. State v. Martinez , 101 Hawai‘i 332, 341, 68 P.3d 606, 615 (2003).11.

  2. State v. Fields

    115 Haw. 503 (Haw. 2007)   Cited 67 times
    Holding that “a trial court's admission of a prior out-of-court statement does not violate the Hawai‘i Constitution's confrontation clause where the declarant appears at trial and the accused is afforded a meaningful opportunity to cross-examine the declarant about the subject matter of that statement”

    Our standard for assessing the sufficiency of the evidence is well settled: "considered in the strongest light for the prosecution," the finding of guilt must be supported by "substantial evidence" — i.e., "credible evidence which is of sufficient quality and probative value to enable a person of reasonable caution to support a conclusion" that every material element of the charged offense was proven. State v. Martinez, 101 Hawai'i 332, 338-39, 68 P.3d 606, 612-13 (2003) (citations omitted). Furthermore, the analysis excludes from its purview all evidence erroneously admitted for consideration by the trier of fact.

  3. State v. Wright

    NO. CAAP-18-0000327 (Haw. Ct. App. May. 16, 2019)

    It is well-settled that the finder of fact "may accept or reject any witness's testimony in whole or in part." State v. Martinez, 101 Hawai'i 332, 340, 68 P.3d 606, 614 (2003) (quoting State v. Birdsall, 88 Hawai'i 1, 9, 960 P.2d 729, 737 (1998)). "It is not the role of the appellate court to weigh credibility or resolve conflicting evidence."

  4. In re DM

    No. SCWC-20-0000485 (Haw. Mar. 15, 2023)

    The test on appeal is not whether guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt, but whether there was substantial evidence to support the conclusion of the trier of fact. 101 Hawai'i 332, 338, 68 P.3d 606, 612 (2003) (cleaned up). IV.

  5. In re Interest of DM

    152 Haw. 469 (Haw. 2023)   Cited 1 times

    The test on appeal is not whether guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt, but whether there was substantial evidence to support the conclusion of the trier of fact.101 Hawai‘i 332, 338, 68 P.3d 606, 612 (2003) (cleaned up).

  6. State v. Bailey

    126 Haw. 383 (Haw. 2012)

    The jury rejected this argument in finding Bailey guilty. “[I]t is well-settled that an appellate court will not pass upon issues dependent upon the credibility of witnesses and the weight of the evidence; this is the province of the trier of fact.” State v. Martinez, 101 Hawai‘i 332, 340, 68 P.3d 606, 614 (2003) (citation omitted). We do not address what weight the lack of DNA evidence should have carried in this case.

  7. State v. Bailey

    126 Haw. 383 (Haw. 2012)

    The jury rejected this argument in finding Bailey guilty. "[I]t is well-settled that an appellate court will not pass upon issues dependent upon the credibility of witnesses and the weight of the evidence; this is the province of the trier of fact." State v. Martinez, 101 Hawai‘i 332, 340, 68 P.3d 606, 614 (2003) (citation omitted). We do not address what weight the lack of DNA evidence should have carried in this case.

  8. Onaka v. Onaka

    112 Haw. 374 (Haw. 2006)   Cited 40 times
    Noting that "[t]he rule in this jurisdiction prohibits an appellant from complaining for the first time on appeal of error to which he has acquiesced or to which he failed to object"

    Given the family court's consideration of the testimony of both doctors, we cannot say that the family court's crediting of Dr. Berry's testimony was an abuse of discretion inasmuch as it is axiomatic that reconciling conflicting testimony is beyond the scope of appellate review. See State v. Martinez, 101 Hawai'i 332, 340, 68 P.3d 606, 614 (2003) ("But `[i]t is well-settled that an appellate court will not pass upon issues dependent upon the credibility of witnesses and the weight of the evidence; this is the province of the trier of fact'") (Alteration in original.) (Citations omitted.

  9. State v. Feliciano

    115 P.3d 648 (Haw. 2005)   Cited 9 times
    Holding that doctor's testimony that the defendant could give a description of the event that comported with the accounts of other witnesses supported the court's conclusion that the defendant was penally responsible for his conduct

    In Interest of John Doe, Born on January 5, 1976, 76 Hawai`i 85, 92-93, 869 P.2d 1304, 1311-12 (1994); see also State v. Valdivia, 95 Hawai`i 465, 471, 24 P.3d 661, 667 (2001).State v. Martinez, 101 Hawai`i 332, 338-39, 68 P.3d 606, 612-13 (2003) (alterations in original). III. DISCUSSION

  10. State v. Keliiheleua

    105 Haw. 174 (Haw. 2004)   Cited 10 times
    Holding that the "time" factor was not satisfied because "although the motor vehicle accident and fraudulent insurance claim occurred on the same day, they did not occur at the same time"

    Both the "clearly erroneous" and "right/wrong" tests must be employed in reviewing the circuit court's denial of a motion to dismiss for preindictment delay. State v. Martinez, 101 Hawai'i 332, 339, 68 P.3d 606, 613 (2003). "A trial court's [findings of fact] are reviewed under the `clearly erroneous' standard."