State v. Sakamoto
Hawaii Supreme Court
1Concurrence
Concurring Opinion by
ACOBA, J.
I concur in the result reached because, in the absence of the legislature’s prohibition of a deferred acceptance of guilty (DAG) or deferred acceptance of no contest (DANC) plea for a particular offense, a trial court has the inherent power to grant or deny a DAG or DANC plea. Inasmuch as the legislature has not prohibited a DANC plea with respect to assault in the second degree, Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS) § 707-711(1)(a) (1993),1 it was within the inherent power of the first circuit court (the court) to grant or to deny the motion of Defendant-Respondent…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Kawamata Farms, Inc. v. United Agri ProductsHawaii Supreme Court · 1997
- Richardson v. Sport Shinko (Waikiki Corp.)Hawaii Supreme Court · 1994
- State v. DannenbergHawaii Supreme Court · 1992
- LeMay v. LeanderHawaii Supreme Court · 2000
- Enos v. Pacific Transfer & Warehouse, Inc.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1995
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.