State v. Phua.
Hawaii Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
*506Opinion of the Court by
POLLACK, J.
This case concerns the right of a defendant to be represented by counsel during criminal proceedings and the importance of ensuring that a waiver of this right is made knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily. Han Kamakani Phua attended his sentencing hearing without his lawyer, and after a brief colloquy with Phua, the district court found that he validly waived his right to counsel and imposed sentence. The Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA) affirmed the finding of the district court that Phua waived his right to counsel and upheld Phua’s sentence. We…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Patterson v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- United States v. AshSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Green v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- State v. Tetu.Hawaii Supreme Court · 2016
- State v. Krstoth.Hawaii Supreme Court · 2016
- State v. Loher.Hawaii Supreme Court · 2017
- State v. Kim.Hawaii Supreme Court · 2017
- State v. DemingHawaii Supreme Court · 2015
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.