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 v. Ganjali

Intermediate Court of Appeals of Hawai‘i

January 10, 2014

STATE of Hawai‘i, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
John GANJALI, Defendant-Appellant.

Editorial Note:

This decision has been designated as "Unpublished disposition." in the Pacific Reporter. See HI R RAP RULE 35

Appeal from the District Court of the First Circuit Honolulu Division (CR. No. 1P110-4458).

Earle A. Partington, on the briefs, for Defendant-Appellant.

Brian R. Vincent Deputy Prosecuting Attorney City and County of Honolulu, on the briefs, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

LEONARD, Presiding Judge, REIFURTH and GINOZA, JJ.

SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER

Defendant-Appellant John Ganjali (Ganjali) appeals from the Notice of Entry of Judgment and/or Order, filed on January 25, 2011, in the District Court of the First Circuit, Honolulu Division (District Court).[1]

Ganjali was found guilty of Harassment, in violation of Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 711-1106(1)(b) (Supp.2010).

On appeal, Ganjali contends: (1) there was insufficient evidence to convict him of Harassment; (2) the District Court erred by denying his motion for a new trial; (3) the District Court erred by failing to, sua sponte, hold an evidentiary hearing on his motion for new trial; (4) the District Court plainly erred by failing to make sufficient findings of fact to permit meaningful appellate review; and (5) the District Court erred by applying a preponderance of the evidence standard, instead of proof beyond a reasonable doubt when finding him guilty.

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 Ganjali's points of error as follows:

(1) When the evidence adduced in the trial is considered in the strongest light for the prosecution, there was substantial evidence to support Ganjali's conviction for Harassment. State v. Matavale, 115 Hawai‘i 149, 157-58, 166 P.3d 322, 330-31 (2007).

HRS § 711-1106(1)(b) provides:

§ 711-1106 Harassment. (1) A person commits the offense of harassment if, with intent to harass, annoy, or alarm any other person, that person:

....

(b) Insults, taunts, or challenges another person in a manner likely to provoke an immediate violent response or that would cause the other person to reasonably believe that the actor intends to cause bodily injury to the recipient or ...

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.