State v. Kaiama

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, as a matter of law, EMED instruction, which was not supported by the evidence, was not required
• “To satisfy the second prong of HRS § 707-702(2), i.e., a reasonable explanation, the defendant must satisfy a subjective/objective test. The circumstances must be viewed as the defendant believed them to be (subjective

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).