State v. Kupihea

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “the privilege against self incrimination extends not only to answers that would in themselves support a conviction, but to those that would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute” (quoting Territory v. Lanier, 40 Haw. 65, 72 (1953)
• “Kupihea’s belief that Kalai was about to shoot him, and the reasonableness of that belief, are facts of consequence to ... self-defense[.]” (Emphasis in original.)
• \evidence is relevant if it possesses a legitimate tendency to establish a controverted fact\ (internal quotation marks omitted)
• “improper comments by a prosecutor can be cured by the court’s instructions to the jury and ... it will be presumed that the jury adhered to the court’s instructions”
• the prosecutor’s use of “hypothetical examples to illustrate legal principles during closing argument ... although arguably improper, ... was not prejudicial”
• “Kupihea has failed to show how the use of hypothetical examples illustrating manslaughter prejudiced him.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).