Oral Arguments before the Supreme Court
NO. 28571 – Thursday, November 19, 2009 – 10 a.m.
NOTE: The recording has been edited to delete the name of a minor.
STATE OF HAWAI`I, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. ARTHUR VINHACA, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant. (Sexual Assault in the Third Degree)
Attorney(s) for Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant(s)
William H. Jameson, Jr.
Attorney(s) for Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee(s)
Honorable Shaylene C. L. Iseri-Carvalho, Prosecuting Attorney, and Tracy J. Murakami, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, County of Kauai
COURT: RTYM, CJ; PAN, SRA, JED & MER, JJ.
On August 19, 2009, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant Arthur Vinhaca (Petitioner) filed an Application for Writ of Certiorari requesting that this court review the judgment of the Intermediate Court of Appeals (the ICA) in State v. Vinhaca, No. No. 28571 (App. April 29, 2009) affirming the April 30, 2007 judgment filed by the circuit court of the fifth circuit (the court) in this criminal sexual assault case.
In Petitioner’s Application, he argues that the ICA erred in concluding that (1) the admission of Petitioner’s younger daughter’s (Daughter 1) preliminary hearing testimony did not violate Petitioner’s right of confrontation where Daughter 1 did not appear at trial; (2) the court did not err in finding that Daughter 1 was unavailable; (3) Petitioner had an adequate opportunity to cross-examine his daughter at the preliminary hearing, thus satisfying the requirements of the confrontation clause; and (4) the deputy prosecuting attorney did not commit misconduct during closing argument when she argued that Petitioner’s older daughter, who did testify at Petitioner’s trial, sounded like the defense attorney in his opening statement.