Oral Agrument Before the Hawaii Supreme Court
No. SCWC-11-0000573, Thursday, April 2, 2015, 11:15 a.m.
STATE OF HAWAI`I, Petitioner and Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellant/Cross-Appellee, vs. PATRICK W. DEGUAIR, JR., Respondent and Petitioner/Defendant-Appellee/Cross-Appellant, and ARYSS DAYNE K. KAMAI, Respondent/Defendant.
The above-captioned case was set for argument on the merits at:
Supreme Court Courtroom
Ali`iolani Hale, 2nd Floor
417 South King Street
Honolulu, HI 96813
Attorney for Petitioner and Respondent State of Hawai`i:
Donn Fudo, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
Attorney for Respondent and Petitioner Patrick W. Deguair, Jr.:
Dwight C.H. Lum
NOTE: Order accepting Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 02/03/15.
COURT: MER, CJ; PAN, SSM, RWP, and MDW, JJ.
Petitioner-Respondent/Appellant-Cross-Appellee/Plaintiff State of Hawai`i applied for writ of certiorari from the judgment of the Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA), entered pursuant to its Summary Disposition Order.
Respondent-Petitioner/Cross-Appellant-Appellee/Defendant Patrick W. Deguair, Jr. (Deguair) also applied for writ of certiorari.
This case arises from the shooting of Jermaine Duckworth. On April 9, 2008, Deguair was indicted for Duckworth’s murder (Count I), kidnapping (Count II), carrying or use of firearm (Counts III and IV), and other offenses.
Deguair’s first trial led to an acquittal on several counts, and a mistrial on Counts I-IV.
After a second trial, the circuit court determined the jury was unable to reach a verdict and declared a mistrial on Counts I-IV. Subsequently, the circuit court concluded it had made an error, reconvened the jurors, and accepted a guilty verdict on Count II. Subsequently, after being contacted by a juror, the circuit court determined that the jury deliberations had been affected by juror misconduct.
The circuit court granted Deguair’s motion to dismiss Counts I, III, and IV under State v. Moriwake, 65 Haw. 47, 647 P.2d 705 (1982). The circuit court also granted Deguair’s motion to vacate his conviction on Count II based on the juror misconduct, but denied his two motions to dismiss Count II. Instead, the circuit court ordered a retrial on Count II. The ICA affirmed the circuit court’s orders on Counts I through IV.
On certiorari, the State presents the following question: Whether the ICA committed grave errors of law and fact in concluding that the State failed to demonstrate the court abused its discretion in its application of the Moriwake factors and by granting Deguair’s motion to dismiss with prejudice the murder and two firearms charges (Counts I, III, and IV).
Deguair presents the following questions:
(1) Did the ICA gravely err in ruling that a retrial of the Count II kidnapping charge was not barred by double jeopardy?
(2) Did the ICA gravely err in failing to address whether the trial court erred in recalling the jury?