Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Maluia

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided March 24, 2005No. 25689Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by

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

We are once again called upon to determine whether a prosecutor’s pointed cross-examination of a defendant oversteps the bounds of permissible advocacy in a criminal proceeding. At issue is the following exchange between the prosecution and defendant-appellant Sapatumoeese Maluia (Mal-uia):

[DEPUTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY (DPA):] Now let me ask you this, Mr. [Maluia]. Had you ever seen Mr. Eugene Kepa [ (Kepa) ] before he came into court the other day?

[MALUIA:] Never have.

[DPA:] Okay. You never saw him there on Thursday…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Alford v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  2. People v. OverleeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
  3. United States v. Adegboyega AkitoyeCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1991
  4. State v. OkumuraHawaii Supreme Court · 1995
  5. State v. RoganHawaii Supreme Court · 1999

18 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