Hawaii Supreme Court· 6/21/2002

State v. Long

Citations

48 P.3d 595
98 Haw. 348
2002 Haw. LEXIS 395

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 third prong was \whether the instrument is in proper working order\
stating that the third prong was “whether the instrument is in proper working order”
affirming that \a 'lack of foundation' objection generally is insufficient to 7 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER preserve foundational issues for appeal because such an objection does not advise the trial court of the problems with the foundation\
vacating and remanding for a new trial in a third-degree promoting of a dangerous drug case, where the admission of the criminalist's testimony regarding the FTIR test result that the substance contained cocaine lacked foundation and was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt
pursuant to HRE Rule 103(a) (1) a specific objection is not required when the defect is apparent from the context of the objection
\[A] 'lack of foundation' objection generally is insufficient to preserve foundational issues for appeal because such an objection does not advise the trial court of the problems with the foundation.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Levinson, Ramil, Acoba, Moon, Nakayama

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

35 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.