Hawaii Supreme Court· 8/10/2001

State v. Garcia

Citations

29 P.3d 919
96 Haw. 200

How courts have described this case

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

holding that “when questions of state law are at issue, state courts generally have the authority to determine the retroactivity of their own decisions” (brackets omitted)
holding that the prosecution failed to provide a “compelling justification” for departing from the doctrine of stare decisis
holding that the prosecution failed to provide a “compelling justification” for departing from the doctrine of stare decisis
stating that “a court should ‘not depart from the doctrine of stare decisis without some compelling justification’ ” (quoting Hilton v. South Carolina Pub. Ry. Comm’n, 502 U.S. 197, 202, 112 S.Ct. 560, 116 L.Ed.2d 560 (1991) (emphasis in original
giving a rule limited prospective application, because the rule had previously been applied in the decision that originally announced the rule
giving a rule limited prospective application, because the rule had previously been applied in the decision that originally announced the rule

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Moon, Levinson, Acoba, Nakayama, Ramil

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

57 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.