STATE OF HAWAI‘I, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. KOA KAAKIMAKA, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant.

The above-captioned case has been set for oral argument on the merits at:

Supreme Court Courtroom
Ali‘iōlani Hale, 2nd Floor
417 South King Street
Honolulu, HI 96813

The oral argument will also be live streamed for public viewing via the Judiciary’s YouTube channel at YouTube.com/hawaiicourts and ‘Ōlelo at olelo.org/tv-schedule/.

Attorney for Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant KOA KAAKIMAKA:
     R. Hermann Heimgartner

Attorneys for Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee STATE OF HAWAI‘I:
     Charles E. Murray III, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney

NOTE: Order assigning Circuit Judge Kevin A.K. Souza due to a vacancy, filed 02/13/26.

NOTE: Order accepting Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 03/04/26.

COURT: Devens, C.J., McKenna, Eddins, and Ginoza, JJ. and Circuit Judge Souza assigned by reason of vacancy.

Brief Description:
Koa Kaakimaka was charged with Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes (HRS) § 711-1110.9(1)(a) violation of privacy in the first degree. While working as a landscaper at a rental property, Kaakimaka had held his phone up to a high-up bathroom window and videorecorded the inside of the bathroom. A minor girl was showering in the bathroom. Kaakimaka later admitted to videorecording the minor. The jury convicted him as charged.

Kaakimaka appealed the charging document, various jury instructions, and the sufficiency of the evidence.  The Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA) vacated the conviction and remanded the case based on the insufficient charge.  It concluded, though, that there was sufficient evidence to sustain the conviction.  This court vacated the ICA’s decision regarding the charging instrument, and remanded for the ICA to address the remaining points of error.

On remand, the ICA held that the circuit court properly declined Kaakimaka’s requested jury instructions defining “installed or used a device in a private place,” and “private place.”  It also affirmed the circuit court’s denial of Kaakimaka’s request for a jury instruction on the lesser included offense of “peeping” under HRS § 711-1111(1)(b).

Kaakimaka appealed.  This court accepted cert, and requested supplemental briefing as to whether there was sufficient evidence to convict Kaakimaka of violation of privacy in the first degree under HRS § 711-1110.9(1)(a).