State v. Tuipuapua

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that HRS ง 712A-11 (1993) \provides that `[a]n acquittal or dismissal in a criminal proceeding shall not preclude civil proceedings under this chapter'\ (emphasis omitted)
• observing that HRS § 712A-11 (1993) “provides that ‘[a]n acquittal or dismissal in a criminal proceeding shall not preclude civil proceedings under this chapter’ ” (emphasis omitted)
• \[T]he government cannot prosecute or punish an individual for the same criminal offense more than once.\
• “[T]he government cannot prosecute or punish an individual for the same criminal offense more than once.”
• “due process requires the government to afford notice and meaningful opportunity to be heard”
• because a civil forfeiture is a proceeding in rem, an individual must make a claim to the property at a forfeiture proceeding to become a party to it and be subjected to jeopardy

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).