History
  • No items yet
midpage
State v. Cabagbag
277 P.3d 1027
Haw.
2012
Read the full case

Background

  • Cabagbag was convicted of Unauthorized Control of a Propelled Vehicle and Theft in the Second Degree based largely on Officer Tomimbang's eyewitness identification.
  • The trial court did not give a specific eyewitness identification cautionary instruction, and neither party requested one.
  • The ICA affirmed, ruling that the circuit court had discretion not to give a cautionary instruction because other trial conduct adequately directed attention to identification.
  • The Hawai`i Supreme Court adopted a new rule requiring a specific eyewitness identification instruction when identification is central and requested by the defendant, and authorized a model instruction.
  • The new rule was held to apply prospectively, not retroactively, affecting cases tried after the decision date.
  • The dissent would have required sua sponte instruction and retroactive application; the majority rejected that approach.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether failure to give an eyewitness instruction was plain error Cabagbag argues the identification issue was central and required a cautionary instruction. Cabagbag contends the instruction was required and omission was plain error; the trial record shows adequate focus otherwise. Conviction affirmed; rule applied prospectively

Key Cases Cited

  • Padilla v. State, 57 Haw. 150 (1976) (eyewitness identification discretion preserved; due process and totality of circumstances)
  • Pahio v. State, 58 Haw. 323 (1977) (eyewitness instruction discretion reaffirmed)
  • Okumura v. State, 78 Hawai`i 383 (1995) (summary of identification instruction approach and discretion)
  • Vinge v. State, 81 Hawai`i 309 (1996) (recognition of eyewitness identification concerns in jury instructions)
  • Perry v. New Hampshire, 132 S. Ct. 716 (2012) (due process did not require pretrial reliability inquiry where not law-enforcement orchestrated)
  • State v. Henderson, 208 N.J. 208 (2011) (enhanced identification instructions for cross-racial identifications)
  • State v. Stenger, 122 Hawai`i 271 (2010) (sua sponte instruction considerations in related context)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: State v. Cabagbag
Court Name: Hawaii Supreme Court
Date Published: May 17, 2012
Citation: 277 P.3d 1027
Docket Number: SCWC-30682
Court Abbreviation: Haw.