Skip to Main Nav Skip to Main Content Skip to Footer Content

Hawaii Supreme Court, Intermediate Court of Appeals, and Honolulu District Court buildings are closed today due to an area power outage. We apologize for the inconvenience.

Oral Arguments before the Hawai`i Supreme Court

NO. 27177 – Thursday, September 4, 2008 – 11:00 a.m.

STATE OF HAWAI`I, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. STEVEN REINHART, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant.
Abuse of Family or Household Member)

Attorney(s) for Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant(s)
Honorable John M. Tonaki, Public Defender, and Kirsha K. M. Durante, Deputy Public Defender

Attorney(s) for Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee(s)
Honorable Benjamin M. Acob, Prosecuting Attorney, and Scott K. Hanano, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, County of Maui,


[ Listen to the entire audio recording in mp3 format ]

Brief description:

Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant Steven Reinhart (Petitioner) was convicted of abuse of family and household members and sentenced to 48 hours in jail. Petitioner appeals the Intermediate Court of Appeals’ (ICA’s) judgment on appeal, arguing that the ICA erred in affirming his conviction based on his alleged violation of a warning citation issued to him by a police officer which temporarily prohibited him from returning to the premises of the residence he shared with his wife because (1) the warning citation was prejudicially flawed in that (a) it failed to adequately define the term “premises,” (b) it was internally ambiguous in its identification of the “premises” in question, and (c) it was unconstitutionally vague and overbroad and (2) there was no substantial evidence that Petitioner “returned to the premises” in violation of the warning citation.