Hawaii Supreme Court· 12/7/2006

State v. Hicks

Citations

148 P.3d 493
113 Haw. 60

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that “[although this court’s consideration of the constitutionality of the sexual assault statutes would not (1) require additional facts or (2
stating, on appeal from trial comí, that “[t]he interpretation of a statute is a question of law renewable de novo” (quoting State v. Kalani, 108 Hawai'i 279, 283, 118 P.3d 1222, 1226 (2005))
“A trial court’s conclusions of law, however, are reviewed de novo, under the right/wrong standard of review.”
“[C]ourts are to give words their ordinary meaning unless something in the statute requires a different interpretation.” (brackets omitted)
\`We answer questions of constitutional law by exercising our own independent constitutional judgment based on the facts of the case.'\ (Quoting State v. Friedman, 93 Hawai'i 63, 67, 996 P.2d 268, 272 (2000).)
“ ‘We answer questions of constitutional law by exercising our own independent constitutional judgment based on the facts of the case.’ ” (Quoting State v. Friedman, 93 Hawai'i 63, 67, 996 P.2d 268, 272 (2000).)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Moon, Levinson, Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

21 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.