State v. Bowe
Hawaii Supreme Court
1ConcurrenceKlein, Justice
The majority correctly affirms the circuit court’s order of suppression. I concur separately because Bowe’s statements were inadmissible pursuant to Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS) § 621-26 (1985), and the constitutional issues need not have been reached. As stated in State v. Kam, 68 Haw. 631, 726 P.2d 263 (1986), “[i]t is axiomatic that appellate courts should pass upon constitutional issues only where the case is such that a decision of such issues is unavoidable.” 68 Haw. at 635, 726 P.2d at 266. In the instant case, HRS § 621-26 provides an independent statutory basis for excluding Bowe’s…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Jackson v. DennoSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- State v. FosterOregon Supreme Court · 1987
- Territory v. Chung NungHawaii Supreme Court · 1912
- Territory v. Young and NozawaHawaii Supreme Court · 1945
- Territory v. FukunagaHawaii Supreme Court · 1929
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.