State v. Mundon., 292 P.3d 205

Indictment filed Aug 15, 2005 with 28 counts from Feb 4–5, 2004 incidents.
First trial: Mundon acquitted on multiple Sexual Assault and TT1 counts; several counts remained.
Remanded for retrial after Mundon I decision; charges renumbered for second trial.
Prior to second trial, discovery request for Complainant materials denied as work product; later discovery issue discussed.
Second trial admitted evidence of acts Mundon was acquitted of in first trial to prove other charges; Mundon appealed.
Hawaii Supreme Court vacated several convictions and sentences, affirmed others, and remanded for new trial or resentencing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Collateral estoppel admissibility of acquitted acts	State urged acts were part of same criminal episode and probative	Mundon argued acquittals bar relitigation of those acts	Collateral estoppel bars relitigating acquitted acts in retrial for related offenses
Harmless error in discovery denial	Discovery denial prejudiced prosecution’s case	Cross-examination and defense materials were hampered	Any discovery error was harmless beyond reasonable doubt given cross-examination
Limits on cross-examination re voluntary release	Cross-exam should allow inquiry into voluntary release to rebut charges	Court properly sustained objection; cross-examination conducted	No reversible error; defense cross was effectively unblocked by rephrasing allowed
References to Complainant as 'victim'	Use of term aids accuracy in testimony	Prejudicial to presumption of innocence	Harmless error; presumption instructions mitigated prejudice
Sentencing reliance on Vinhaca case and pre-sentence materials	Consecutive sentences justified by similarity and harm	Improper reliance on materials not available to Mundon; potential disparity	Vacate in part; remand for new sentencing; error in using unshared materials

Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436 (U.S. 1970) (collateral estoppel in criminal prosecutions; final judgment limits relitigation of issues)
Dowling v. United States, 493 U.S. 342 (U.S. 1990) (acquittal may not bar use of acquitted acts under Rule 404(b) context; tension with Ashe)
Nomura v. State, 79 Hawai‘i 413, 903 P.2d 718 (Haw. App. 1995) (reference to use of acquitted acts and presumption issues; harmless error framework)
United States v. Bailin, 977 F.2d 270 (7th Cir. 1992) (collateral estoppel under multi-count retrial scenarios)
Odum v. State, 989 A.2d 232 (Md. 2010) ( Maryland rule on admissibility of acquitted acts; comparative precedent)
Mundon v. State, 121 Hawai‘i 339, 219 P.3d 1126 (2009) (Mundon I; capital issues on unanimity and double jeopardy)