Knight v. State, 051616 HIICA, CAAP-15-0000444
|Party Name:||JOHN E. KNIGHT, Petitioner-Appellant, v. STATE OF HAWAI'I, Respondent-Appellee|
|Attorney:||Jeffrey A. Hawk (Hawk Sing & Ignacio) for Petitioner-Appellant. Diane K. Taira Lisa M. Itomura Deputy Attorneys General for Respondent-Appellee.|
|Judge Panel:||Nakamura, C.J., Foley and Leonard, JJ.|
|Case Date:||May 16, 2016|
|Court:||Court of Appeals of Hawai'i, Intermediate|
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI'I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
Appeal From The Circuit Court of The Circuit Circuit (Special Proceeding Prisoner No. 14-1-0023 (Cr. No. 91-2108))
Petitioner-Appellant John E. Knight (Knight) appeals from the "Order Denying [Knight's] Petition for Post-Conviction Relief Without a Hearing" entered on May 8, 2015 in the Circuit Court of the First Circuit1 (circuit court).
On appeal, Knight contends the circuit court erred in denying his Hawai'i Rules of Penal Procedure (HRPP) Rule. 40 Petition without a hearing.
On March 2, 1994, Knight was convicted of murder in the second degree. The Hawaii Paroling Authority (HPA) set Knight's minimum term of imprisonment at thirty-five years.
On January 22, 2009, Knight requested, from the HPA, a new minimum-term hearing based on the Hawai'i Supreme Court's y decision in Coulter v. State, 116 Hawai'i 181, 172 P.3d 493 (2007).2 There is no information in the record pertaining to a hearing on the new minimum-term hearing or to the information the HPA considered in setting a new minimum-term, and there is no transcript of the hearing in the record. The HPA issued a "Notice of Order of Fixing Minimum Term(s) of Imprisonment" on July 15, 2009, setting Knight's minimum-term at thirty-five years. The HPA determined that Knight's crime warranted "Level III" punishment, and identified the "Nature of the Offense" and "Degree of Loss to Person" as significant factors in determining the punishment level of Knight's crime.
On October 2, 2009, Knight filed a writ of habeas corpus with the circuit court (Non-Conforming Petition). The circuit court entered an order designating the motion as a nonconforming petition for post-conviction relief under HRPP Rule 40 and directed Knight to supplement the petition by January 4, 2010. Knight's Non-Conforming Petition was dismissed because Knight failed to comply with the order. Knight v. State, No. CAAP-11-0000472 at *1 (App. Dec. 7, 2012) ‹SDO)
On September 13, 2010, Knight filed an HRPP Rule 40 petition (2010 Rule 40 Petition), which the circuit court denied on May 27, 2011. Id. This court affirmed the circuit court's denial. Id.
On September 23, 2014, Knight filed a "Petition to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Illegal Sentence Through a Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to HRPP Rule 40" (2014 Rule 40 Petition). In his 2014 Rule 40 Petition, Knight describes the issues...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP