State v. Kanoa

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Electronically Filed
Intermediate Court of Appeals
CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
24-OCT-2024
08:15 AM
Dkt. 106 ODMR

CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF HAWAI#I

STATE OF HAWAI#I, Plaintiff-Appellee, v.
OSCAR KANOA, Defendant-Appellant

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT
(CRIMINAL NO. 1CPC-XX-XXXXXXX)

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
(By: Leonard, Acting Chief Judge, Hiraoka and Wadsworth, JJ.)

Upon consideration of Defendant-Appellant Oscar Kanoa's

(Kanoa) August 29, 2024 [Kanoa's] Motion for Reconsideration, it

appears that Kanoa requests reconsideration of this court's

August 19, 2024 Summary Disposition Order, arguing that the court

erred by failing to analyze Kanoa's arguments based on the

standard applicable to motions for judgment of acquittal.

As argued by Kanoa, the Hawai#i Supreme Court has held:
When reviewing a motion for judgment of acquittal, we
employ the same standard that a trial court applies to such
a motion, namely, whether, upon the evidence viewed in the
light most favorable to the prosecution and in full
recognition of the province of the trier of fact, the
evidence is sufficient to support a prima facie case so that
a reasonable mind might fairly conclude guilt beyond a
reasonable doubt. Sufficient evidence to support a prima
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

facie case requires "substantial evidence" as to every
material element of the offense charged. "Substantial
evidence" as to every material element of the offense
charged is credible evidence which is of sufficient quality
and probative value to enable a person of reasonable caution
to support a conclusion. Under such a review, we give "full
play to the right of the fact finder to determine
credibility, weigh the evidence, and draw justifiable
inferences of fact."

State v. Angei, 152 Hawai#i 484, 492, 526 P.3d 461, 469 (2023)

(citations omitted).

On appeal, with respect to the motion for judgment of

acquittal, Kanoa's argument was that the State presented no

evidence that Bonnie Vierra's (Vierra's) life could have been

saved with earlier medical intervention and no evidence that

Kanoa failed to call for medical intervention at the first sign

that Vierra was suffering from serious physical injury. Upon

further and full consideration of, inter alia, this court's

disposition and Kanoa's argument for reconsideration, we conclude

that although the above-referenced standard was not specifically

set forth in the summary form of disposition utilized in this

case, it was properly analyzed and applied to the parties'

arguments and the record in this case. Accordingly, we conclude

that Kanoa fails to demonstrate that the court overlooked or

misapprehended any point of law or fact when it issued the August

19, 2024 Summary Disposition Order. See Hawai#i Rules of

Appellate Procedure (HRAP) Rule 40(b).

2
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that [Kanoa's] Motion

for Reconsideration is denied.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, October 24, 2024.

/s/ Katherine G. Leonard
Acting Chief Judge

/s/ Keith K. Hiraoka
Associate Judge

/s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth
Associate Judge

3