429 P.3d 604 (Hawaii App. 2018), CAAP-17-0000824, State v. Wykes
|Citation:||429 P.3d 604, 143 Hawaii 282|
|Party Name:||STATE of Hawaii, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Chance WYKES, Defendant-Appellee, and Layton Kane, Defendant-Appellant|
|Attorney:||Walter R. Schoettle, Honolulu, for Defendant-Appellant. Loren J. Thomas, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, City and County of Honolulu, for Plaintiff-Appellee.|
|Judge Panel:||By: Fujise, Presiding Judge, Leonard and Reifurth, JJ.|
|Case Date:||October 31, 2018|
|Court:||Court of Appeals of Hawai'i, Intermediate|
This decision has been designated as "Unpublished disposition." in the Pacific Reporter. See HI R RAP RULE 35
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT (CRIMINAL NO. 1CPC-17-0000159)
On the briefs:
Walter R. Schoettle, Honolulu, for Defendant-Appellant.
Loren J. Thomas, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, City and County of Honolulu, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
By: Fujise, Presiding Judge, Leonard and Reifurth, JJ.
SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER
Defendant-Appellant Layton Kane (Kane) appeals from the Judgment of Conviction and Probation Sentence (Judgment) entered on October 26, 2017, in the Circuit Court of the First Circuit (Circuit Court).1 Following a bench trial, Kane was convicted of one count of Promoting a Dangerous Drug in the Third Degree, a violation of Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 712-1243 (2014),2 and sentenced to four years of probation.
Kane raises two points of error on appeal, contending that: (1) the Circuit Court erred in admitting Plaintiff-Appellee State of Hawaiis (the States) Exhibit 6 to establish the chain of custody of the heroin that was allegedly in Kanes possession when he was arrested; and (2) evidence of a prior custodial search by a Honolulu Police Department (HPD) Officer J. De Leon (Officer De Leon) was sufficient to enable a person of reasonable caution to conclude that the ziplock bag containing heroin was not in Kanes possession at the time of his arrest.
Upon careful review of the record and the briefs submitted by the parties and having given due consideration to the arguments advanced and the issues raised by the parties, we resolve Kanes points of error as follows:
(1) Kane objected to the admission of Exhibit 6 on the the grounds of authenticity because it was not the original HPD evidence chain of custody record.
Pursuant to Hawaii Rules of Evidence (HRE)...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP