State v. Mersberg

• Court: Hawaii Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: RICHARDSON, C. J., OGATA and MENOR, JJ., and MARUMOTO and KOBAYASHI; PER CURIAM
• Citation: State v. Mersberg, 594 P.2d 1078, 61 Haw. 1 (Haw. 1979)
• Decision Date: 07 May 1979
• Docket Number: No. 6250,6250
• Parties: STATE of Hawaii, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James A. MERSBERG, Defendant-Appellant.

Page 1078

594 P.2d 1078

61 Haw. 1

STATE of Hawaii, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James A. MERSBERG, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 6250.

Supreme Court of Hawai'i.

May 7, 1979.

Syllabus by the Court

A trial judge in the sentencing process should always consider all possible alternative sentences.

Renee M. L. Yuen, Deputy Public Defender, Honolulu (Edmund K. U. Yee, Deputy Public Defender, Honolulu, with her on briefs), for defendant-appellant.

Albert H. Esposito, Deputy Pros. Atty., Honolulu (Keith L. Walker, Deputy Pros. Atty., Honolulu, on brief), for plaintiff-appellee.

RICHARDSON, C. J., OGATA and MENOR, JJ., and MARUMOTO and KOBAYASHI, Retired Justices, assigned by reason of vacancies.

PER CURIAM.

The Court has reviewed the record in this case and has considered the issues and arguments raised by the parties. Based upon the facts and circumstances of this case and upon applicable law, the Court concludes that there is no reversible error.

A trial judge in the disposition of any matter before him, Particularly in the sentencing process, should always consider all of the possible alternatives available. . . . (Emphasis added.)

State v. Martin, 56 Haw. 292, 294, 535 P.2d 127, 128 (1975).

In the instant case we are satisfied that the trial court did consider all possible alternative sentences, including the provisions of HRS § 706-667. However, in order to forestall any claims that the court failed to do so, the trial court would be well advised to state clearly on the record that these...