84 Hawai'i 280, State v. Kaakimaka, 18512
| Decision Date | 27 February 1997 |
| Docket Number | No. 18512,18512 |
| Citation | 933 P.2d 617 |
| Parties | 84 Hawai'i 280 STATE of Hawai'i, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Blaine KAAKIMAKA, Audwin Aiwohi, and Darren Dacosin, Defendants-Appellees, and John Joseph Griffiths, also known as "Joe," and Michael Hee, Defendants. |
| Court | Hawaii Supreme Court |
Reginald P. Minn, on the briefs, Honolulu, for defendant-appellee Audwin Aiwohi.
Richard L. Hoke, on the briefs, Honolulu, for defendant-appellee Darren Dacosin.
Stacy Moniz, on the briefs, Honolulu, for defendant-appellee Blaine Kaakimaka.
Before MOON, C.J., and KLEIN, LEVINSON, NAKAYAMA and RAMIL, JJ.
Plaintiff-appellant State of Hawai'i (the prosecution) appeals from the First Circuit Court's order dismissing the charge of conspiracy to commit murder in the second degree against defendants-appellees Blaine Kaakimaka, Audwin Aiwohi, and Darren Dacosin (collectively, the defendants 1). On appeal, the prosecution alleges that the circuit court erroneously determined that (1) the statutory scheme under which the defendants were charged was unconstitutionally vague and (2) the indictment was untimely.
For the reasons set forth below, we hold that: (1) the statutory scheme governing the offense of conspiracy to commit second degree murder is not unconstitutionally vague; (2) the statute of limitations for conspiracy to commit second degree murder is three years, and, for sentencing purposes, it is a class C felony; and (3) the indictment, with respect to conspiracy to commit second degree murder, was untimely returned. Accordingly, we affirm the circuit court's order, dismissing the charge of conspiracy to commit murder in the second degree against the defendants.
I. BACKGROUND
Eric Kamanu was killed on August 4, 1989. An autopsy revealed that he died as a result of three gunshot wounds to the head and one to the neck. On July 8, 1993, approximately three years and eleven months after Kamanu's death, the prosecution brought charges by way of indictment against the defendants for conspiracy to commit murder in the second degree and against codefendants John Joseph Griffiths and Michael Hee (collectively, the co-defendants 2) for murder in the second degree. At the grand jury proceedings, the grand jury heard testimony from three prosecution witnesses: (1) Mary Flynn, M.D., First Deputy Medical Examiner for the Department of Medical Examiner for the City and County of Honolulu, who testified regarding the cause of Kamanu's death; (2) Michael Santana; and (3) Raymond Lau. Both Santana and Lau were involved with and testified to the events surrounding Kamanu's death.
Dr. Flynn testified that Kamanu died as a result of gunshot wounds to the head and neck, any one of which could have independently caused his death.
Santana testified that he, Kamanu, Lau, the defendants, and the co-defendants all knew each other "through the drug business." Regarding the murder of Kamanu, Santana testified that the following events occurred: On the night of August 2, 1989, Santana, Kaakimaka, Aiwohi, Dacosin, and Griffiths met informally at Flamingo's Restaurant in Kaneohe. At the meeting, they all participated in a discussion about killing Kamanu for allegedly having "squealed on [Santana] at the airport" for being in possession of cocaine. It was agreed that Griffiths would do the "actual killing," but that Santana was invited to "help shoot [Kamanu] ... for revenge for what he did." Although Santana was reluctant to participate in the murder, he played along so that the others would not "have to do me in too."
After the decision to kill Kamanu was made, Santana and Griffiths left Flamingo's and drove to Waikiki to acquire a gun, find Kamanu, and kill him. While in a parking lot across from Cilly's Night Club, Santana saw Lau and motioned for him to come over to the car. When Lau approached, Santana told him, Lau responded, "Okay," left momentarily, and returned with a gun.
Griffiths and Santana then left the parking lot to meet with Hee and to determine Kamanu's whereabouts. When they learned that Kamanu was not alone, the three decided that it was too dangerous to kill him right at that moment. With murder plans foiled, Santana began to reflect on the possible consequences of killing Kamanu and decided that the whole idea "was pretty crazy." Santana feared that, because he had been "busted with all [the] coke[,] ... maybe [Griffiths] was going to turn around and hit [him] at the same time...." Santana therefore decided not to participate in the killing and had no further contact with the defendants or the co-defendants until sometime after the murder.
Santana testified that on August 4, 1989, the day of the murder, he had been arrested and incarcerated at the Oahu Community Correctional Center (OCCC) for offenses unrelated to the present appeal. While watching the news a couple of days later, he heard that Kamanu had been killed on August 4, 1989. Santana also testified, and the prosecution alleged in the indictment, that, sometime during the winter of 1992, Santana once again had contact with some of the defendants regarding the murder. He spoke, on one occasion, with Kaakimaka and Aiwohi by telephone and was told to "hang tough." On another occasion, Aiwohi told him "to keep quiet." Santana testified that Lau, who was also subsequently incarcerated, was approached and warned by Kaakimaka and others to withhold information from the police. Santana also spoke in detail with Hee who "told [Santana] everything[;] step by step how they did it." According to Santana, Hee related the events over a series of conversations; sometimes just the two of them were present, and, at other times, Lau was also present.
Lau testified to the following: On the evening of August 3, 1989, Griffiths and Hee asked Kamanu to join them for drinks at Flamingo's. While at Flamingo's, Hee told them he needed to go to Waimanalo. The three got into Kamanu's car, but Hee drove; Kamanu sat in the front passenger seat, and Griffiths sat in the back. Before they reached Waimanalo, Griffiths said he needed to use the restroom. Hee pulled the car on to a secluded side road and stopped near some bushes. Kamanu got out to stretch. While Kamanu had his arms raised in the air, Griffiths put a gun to the back of Kamanu's head and shot him. Kamanu fell to the ground, and Griffiths promptly fired two more shots into Kamanu's face. Hee and Griffiths, together, then placed their hands on the gun and, in unison, shot Kamanu in the face a final time.
Griffiths dragged the lifeless body into the bushes and "stomped on [Kamanu's] head a Griffiths then drove Hee to Hee's place of employment so that "Hee could make it to work on time so he would have a good alibi." Griffiths then drove to and spent approximately twenty minutes at a church parking lot in Kahala, wiping down the inside of Kamanu's car. Griffiths abandoned the car there, walked to a 7-Eleven Store, and called Aiwohi's house, requesting that someone come and pick him up. Dacosin, Kaakimaka, and Lau were with Aiwohi at Aiwohi's house. Dacosin and Lau drove to the 7-Eleven and returned to Aiwohi's house with Griffiths, whereupon Kaakimaka and Aiwohi shook Griffiths' hand, and Aiwohi congratulated him on a "good job."
[84 Hawai'i 283] couple more times...." He then took Kamanu's waist pouch, his California driver's license, and his black "drug-deal book." Griffiths and Hee got back into Kamanu's car and headed toward Kaakimaka's house in Hawai'i Kai. On the way, somewhere near Makapu'u, Griffiths tossed the gun into the ocean. Once at Kaakimaka's house, Griffiths changed out of his blood-stained clothes and took a shower. After washing the blood off of Kamanu's car, Griffiths and Hee drove to a drainage ditch near Kaakimaka's house, where Griffiths discarded his bloodied clothing
Griffiths relayed the details of what had happened. Kaakimaka was upset that Griffiths had discarded his clothes so close to Kaakimaka's house. Also, there was confusion regarding the "two grand" in Kamanu's pouch. Those present at Aiwohi's house had anticipated a much larger sum because "[Kamanu] was a pretty big drug dealer ... and he was supposed to have a lot of money with him that night ... [but] Hee said he didn't know where the rest of the money was." The defendants and codefendants spent the next half hour to forty-five minutes confirming their alibis. Dacosin then burned Kamanu's black book and his driver's license because "[Kaakimaka] said they'd be all screwed up if anyone else found that black book with [Griffiths'] prints or anyone's prints on it ... that would link them directly to [Kamanu]."
Lau testified that in December 1989, he was "arrested for drugs." Shortly thereafter, Kaakimaka and Dacosin met with Lau to admonish him against revealing anything about the murder of Kamanu while being questioned about the drug charges. They reminded him to keep quiet and to "say nothing about what happened about the murder." Notwithstanding such warning, Lau "talked to ... Santana ... [and] to ... Hee about it" while Lau was incarcerated at Halawa prison.
On July 8, 1993, the grand jury returned a two-count indictment: (1) Count I charged the co-defendants with murder in the second degree; and (2) Count II charged the defendants with conspiracy to commit murder in the second degree. Pursuant to a motion to dismiss brought by the defendants, the circuit court, by order filed February 17, 1994, dismissed Count II without prejudice for insufficient evidence to support allegations that the defendants had used a firearm in the commission of the offense and for failure to allege the relevant sentencing provision.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Stan's Contracting, Inc.
...a plain, concise and definite written statement of the essential facts constituting the offense charged."); State v. Kaakimaka, 84 Hawai`i 280, 29[5], 933 P.2d 617, 6[32] (1997) (Indictment alleging conspiracy violated Due Process when charging instrument failed to provide defendant notice ......
-
Beneficial Hawaii, Inc. v. Kida
...to and preserve all words of the statute." In re Doe, 90 Hawai`i 246, 250, 978 P.2d 684, 688 (1999) (quoting State v. Kaakimaka, 84 Hawai`i 280, 289-90, 933 P.2d 617, 626-27 (1997)). Furthermore, most of the detailed exemptions enumerated in HRS § 454-2, see supra note 1, would be unnecessa......
-
Castro v. Melchor
...that "[w]here a criminal statute is ambiguous, it is to be interpreted according to the rule of lenity"); State v. Kaakimaka, 84 Hawai‘i 280, 292, 933 P.2d 617, 629 (1997) (stating that "[a]mbiguity concerning the ambit of criminal statutes should be resolved in favor of lenity") (citations......
-
State v. Borner
...(“Thus, the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on conspiracy to commit second-degree murder.”); State v. Kaakimaka, 84 Hawai‘i 280, 295, 933 P.2d 617, 632 (1997) (“[W]e hold that: (1) the statutory scheme governing the offense of conspiracy to commit second degree murder is n......