Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State of Hawaii v. Aliikea Basham

October 26, 2012

STATE OF HAWAII, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
ALIIKEA BASHAM, AKA ALIIKEA I. BASHAM, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT,
AND
MICHAEL BASHAM, DEFENDANT



APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT (CR. NO. 10-1-0663)

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAII REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER

(By: Fujise, Presiding Judge, Leonard and Ginoza, JJ.)

Defendant-Appellant Aliikea Basham (Basham) appeals from the September 19, 2011 Judgment of Conviction and Sentence entered by the Circuit Court of the First Circuit (Circuit Court), *fn1 following a jury trial wherein Basham was found guilty of the charge of Assault in the First Degree, in violation of Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 707-710 (1993).*fn2

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAII REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Basham contends, in four points of error, that the Circuit Court erred when it denied his motion for a mistrial due to prosecutorial misconduct based on:

1. the prosecutor's reference in rebuttal closing argument to facts not in evidence;

2. the prosecutor's statement during rebuttal closing argument that Basham reviewed a witness's initial written statement prior to Basham's own testimony;

3. in closing argument, the prosecutor's misstatement of the law related to accomplice liability; and, for these reasons,

4. the Circuit Court erred when it denied Basham's motion for mistrial based upon these acts of prosecutorial misconduct.

Upon careful review of the record and the briefs submitted by the parties and having given due consideration to the arguments advanced and the issues raised by the parties, we resolve Basham's points of error as follows:

[W]henever a defendant alleges prosecutorial misconduct, [the appellate court] must decide: (1) whether the conduct was improper; (2) if the conduct was improper, whether the misconduct was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt; and (3) if the misconduct was not harmless, whether the misconduct was so egregious as to bar reprosecution.

State v. Maluia, 107 Hawaii 20, 26, 108 P.3d 974, 980 (2005).

The harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard "requires an examination of the record and a determination of whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction." ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.