Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Stenger

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided March 4, 2010No. 27511Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

NAKAYAMA, J.,

in which MOON, C.J., joins in part.

I respectfully dissent from the majority’s holdings that: (1) the ICA gravely erred because the trial court should have sua sponte instructed the jury on the mistake of fact defense; and (2) the trial court’s failure to separately instruct the jury on the mistake of fact defense was not harmless.

A. The Trial Court Was Not Required To Instruct the Jury Sua Sponte On the Mistake Of Fact Defense.

The majority holds that the ICA gravely erred because the trial court should have sua sponte instructed the jury on the mistake of…

2Cases cited58 opinions

  1. Herring v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. People v. SedenoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
  3. People v. MauryCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
  4. People v. BartonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
  5. People v. CarpenterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997

53 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