Hawaii Supreme Court· 11/7/1994

State v. Elliott

Citations

884 P.2d 372
77 Haw. 309

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that statutory references in charge “did not cure the omission of essential elements in the challenged counts of the charge”
holding a charge that omits the crime’s requisite state of mind cannot reasonably be construed to state an offense
remanding for entry of judgment of conviction on lesser included offense where indictment failed to allege all of the essential elements of the greater offense for which a conviction was obtained
reversing defendant’s convictions for resisting arrest and assault against a police officer because the State had omitted an essential element of those offenses and reference to the statute did not cure that defect
“One way in which an otherwise deficient count can be reasonably construed to charge a crime is by examination of the charge as a whole.”
“To allow a mere statutory reference to cure the omission of essential elements would completely vitiate the rule of law developed in Jen-drusch, Motto, and Yonaha.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Klein, Levinson, Moon, Nakayama, Ramil, Yim

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

39 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.