State v. Villeza

How courts have described this case

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

• finding an expert’s review of records, interviews, and reports sufficient in his development of a dangerousness assessment
• involving HRS § 706-662(3) (1993), finding that “[t]he defendant is a dangerous person whose imprisonment for an extended term is necessary for protection of the public”
• “We determine substantial compliance with a statute by determining whether the statute has been followed sufficiently such that the intent for which it was adopted is carried out.”
• \[d]eparture from the literal construction of a statute is justified only when such construction would produce an absurd and unjust result and the literal construction is clearly inconsistent with the purposes and policies of the statute[]\ (citations omitted)
• “[departure from the literal construction of a statute is justified only when such construction would produce an absurd and unjust result and the literal construction is clearly inconsistent with the purposes and policies of the statute[ ]” (citations omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).