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.

Ah Sing v. State

Intermediate Court of Appeals of Hawai‘i

January 31, 2014

Cedric AH SING, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
STATE of Hawai‘i, Respondent-Appellee.

Editorial Note:

This decision has been designated as "Unpublished disposition."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

Appeal from the Circuit Court of the First Circuit (S.P.P. No. 11-1-0035 (CR. No. 56581)).

Cedric Ah Sing, on the briefs, Petitioner-Appellant Pro Se.

Loren J. Thomas, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, City and County of Honolulu, on the briefs, for Respondent-Appellee.

NAKAMURA, Chief Judge, FOLEY and LEONARD, JJ.

SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER

Plaintiff-Appellant Cedric Ah Sing (Ah Sing) filed a " Petition for Post-Conviction Relief" (Petition) pursuant to Hawai‘i Rules of Penal Procedure (HRPP) Rule 40 (2006). He also moved for appointment of counsel with respect to the Petition. The Circuit Court of the First Circuit (Circuit Court) denied Ah Sing's Petition and motion for appointment of counsel without a hearing. [1]

Ah Sing appeals pro se from the Circuit Court's " Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order Denying Petition for Post-Conviction Relief Without a Hearing and Denial of Motion for Appointed Counsel" (Order Denying Petition and Motion for Appointment of Counsel), which was filed on May 10, 2012. On appeal, Ah Sing argues that the Circuit Court erred by: (1) failing to determine that his extended term sentences were illegal, where the aggravating circumstances were not charged in the indictment and found by a jury; (2) failing to retroactively apply Act 1 of the Second Special Session of 2007 (Act 1), 2007 Haw. Sess. Laws, Second Spec. Sess., Act 1, §§ 1-8 at 1-4, to vacate his extended term sentences; (3) failing to appoint counsel to represent him in the HRPP Rule 40 proceedings; and (4) " hastily resolving [his] case to avoid any mandamus ruling[.]" As explained below, we affirm the Circuit Court.

I.

In his underlying criminal case, Ah Sing was indicted on January 6, 1982, and charged with two counts of Robbery in the First Degree (Counts I and II) and one count of Possession of Firearm by a Person Convicted of Certain Crimes (Count III). After a jury trial, Ah Sing was found guilty as charged on all three counts. Respondent-Appellee State of Hawai‘i (State) filed a Motion for Extended Term of Imprisonment, pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) §§ 706-661 and -662(4) (1976); a Motion for Mandatory Term of Imprisonment; and a Motion for Sentencing of Repeat Offender.

The Circuit Court granted the State's motion for extended terms of imprisonment, finding that Ah Sing was a multiple offender under HRS § 706-662(4) " whose criminality was so extensive that a sentence of imprisonment for an extended term is warranted in each count," and the Circuit Court also granted the State's motion for mandatory minimum terms of imprisonment. The Circuit Court sentenced Ah Sing to extended terms of imprisonment of life imprisonment with the possibility of parole on Counts I and II and ten years of imprisonment on Count III. The Circuit Court also imposed ten-year mandatory minimum terms on Counts I and II. The Circuit Court entered its Judgment on May 24, 1982. Ah Sing did not appeal from the Judgment, and therefore, his conviction and sentence became final on or about June 23, 1982. See Hawai‘i Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 73(a) (1980) (requiring that a notice of appeal be filed within 30 days from the entry of judgment).

Almost thirty years later, on June 21, 2011, Ah Sing filed the instant Petition pursuant to HRPP Rule 40. The sole ground Ah Sing raised in his Petition was: " Illegal Extended Sentence to Life/with," for which he provided the following supporting facts: " Extended Sentence not charged in indictment or put before the jury. Also, all counts were to be charged as one count, Repeat offender motion denied[.]" On August 2, 2011, Ah Sing filed a Motion for Appointment of Counsel with respect to his Rule 40 Petition.

On May 10, 2012, the Circuit Court issued its Order Denying Petition and Motion for Appointment of Counsel. The Circuit Court concluded that Ah Sing's claim for relief was foreclosed by controlling precedent, was " patently frivolous," and was " without trace of support either in the record or from other evidence submitted by [Ah Sing]." The Circuit Court therefore ...


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.