Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Miller.

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided January 25, 2010No. 28849Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

NAKAYAMA, J., in which substitute Justice HIRAI Joins.

I respectfully dissent. I agree with the ICA that Miller forfeited his claim for breached plea agreement when he failed to raise this issue before the trial court. Moreover, inasmuch as Miller does not point to any error committed by the trial court, and also failed to argue how the breached plea agreement affected his substantial rights, the Intermediate Court of Appeals (“ICA”) would have had to notice this claim under the plain error standard sua sponte. The ICA did not gravely err in affirming Miller’s conviction…

2Cases cited105 opinions

  1. United States v. OlanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  2. Penson v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  3. Wainwright v. SykesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  4. United States v. FradySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  5. Santobello v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1971

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

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

Powered by the Exa API