Legal Opinion

Paa v. Richardson

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided April 15, 1888PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Petition for Writ of Mandamus to Certify up an Appeal. The Government claims that the law in question is no violation of the constitutional right of trial by jury, because plaintiffs by the act of appealing to the Circuit Judge elected such Court rather than fhe Circuit Court, or waived their constitutional right of trial by jury.

Read the full summary

Petition for Writ of Mandamus to Certify up an Appeal. The Government claims that the law in question is no violation of the constitutional right of trial by jury, because plaintiffs by the act of appealing to the Circuit Judge elected such Court rather than fhe Circuit Court, or waived their constitutional right of trial by jury. Election or waiver is a question of fact, i.e., did the man, as a matter of fact, choose between the two Courts? Or in other words, did he waive as a matter of fact his trial by jury? Certainly there is no proof of this, other than the mere fact of the appeal to the…

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion of the Court, by

Judd, C.J.

This is a petition for a writ of mandamus to direct the Circuit Judge of the Second Judicial Circuit to allow and certify an appeal to the Circuit Court of said Circuit.

The agreed facts are as follows: The petitioners were arrested and convicted of the offense of larceny of animals before the District Court of Makawao, Maui, from which judgment and conviction they appealed to Judge Richardson, the Circuit Judge of the Second Judicial Circuit, at Chambers, who, on the 9th day of March, 1888, tried and found them guilty, and sentenced them for such offense.…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Somerville's Executors v. HamiltonSupreme Court of the United States · 1819
  2. State v. KaufmanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1879
  3. State v. TullerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1867
  4. Tabor v. CookMichigan Supreme Court · 1867
  5. State v. WordenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1878

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Dio Matsumoto v. Kami ToraichiHawaii Supreme Court · 1928
  2. In re the Bankruptcy of Tai LungHawaii Supreme Court · 1893

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API