720 P.2d 1009 (Hawai'i 1986), 10841, State v. Brandimart

Docket Nº:S.C. 10841.
Citation:720 P.2d 1009, 68 Haw. 495
Opinion Judge:[10] Wakatsuki
Party Name:STATE of Hawaii, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael P. BRANDIMART, aka Michael Brandimart, aka Michael Phelix Brandimart, Defendant-Appellee.
Attorney:[7] Janet R. Garcia, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney for Plaintiff-Appellant. [8] Richard Pollack (Susan Barr and Deborah Kim on the Brief) for Defendant-Appellee.
Case Date:June 16, 1986
Court:Supreme Court of Hawai'i
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 1009

720 P.2d 1009 (Hawai'i 1986)

68 Haw. 495

STATE of Hawaii, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

Michael P. BRANDIMART, aka Michael Brandimart, aka Michael

Phelix Brandimart, Defendant-Appellee.

No. S.C. 10841.

Supreme Court of Hawai'i.

June 16, 1986

Syllabus by the Court

1. Compliance with the requirement of filing a timely notice of appeal is jurisdictional.

2. In a criminal proceeding, a motion for reconsideration does not toll the thirty (30) day period for filing a notice of appeal.

[68 Haw. 497] Janet R. Garcia, Deputy Pros. Atty., County of Hawaii, Hilo, for plaintiff-appellant.

Richard Pollack, Deputy Public Defender, (Susan Barr and Deborah Kim, Deputy Public Defenders, on brief), Honolulu, for defendant-appellee.

Before LUM, C.J., and NAKAMURA, PADGETT, HAYASHI and WAKATSUKI, JJ.

WAKATSUKI, Justice.

The State appeals the order granting the defendant's motion to suppress and the order denying the State's motion for reconsideration. [68 Haw. 496] The dispositive issue is whether the thirty (30) day requirement for filing a notice of appeal is tolled by the State's motion for reconsideration. We answer in the negative.

I.

Defendant-appellee Michael P. Brandimart was arrested and charged with committing the offense of Promoting Detrimental Drugs in the Second Degree in violation of Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 712-1248 (1976). Defendant filed a motion to suppress evidence and asserted that the affidavit in support of the issuance of the search warrant failed to show probable cause. By a written decision filed on July 16, 1985, the trial court granted defendant's motion and all the evidence seized pursuant to the search warrant was ordered suppressed.

On July 26, 1985 the State filed a motion for reconsideration of the order granting the motion to suppress evidence. The trial court orally denied the motion on August 8, 1985, but no written order by the court was filed. The State filed its notice of appeal on August 19, 1985.

Page 1010

II.

A court always has jurisdiction to determine whether it has jurisdiction over a particular case. See In re National Labor Relations Board, 304 U.S. 486, 58 S.Ct. 1001, 82 L.Ed. 1482 (1938); State v. Johnston, 63 Haw. 9, 619 P.2d 1076 (1980). However, the court may not be able to maintain jurisdiction for the purpose of determining the merits of the case. Waianae Coast Neighborhood...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP