No. SCWC-22-0000468, Wednesday, April 24, 2024, 10 a.m.

STATE OF HAWAI‘I, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. JOHN SING, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant, and ABRAHAM SIONESINI, Defendant-Appellee.

[ Listen to the audio recording in MP3 format ]

[ Watch the video recording on YouTube ]

The above-captioned case was 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 was also livestreamed for public viewing via the Judiciary’s YouTube channel at YouTube.com/hawaiicourts and ʻŌlelo Community Television 49.

Attorney for Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant JOHN SING:

     Daniel Kawamoto of the Law Office of Daniel Kawamoto

Attorney for Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee STATE OF HAWAI‘I:

     Robert T. Nakatsuji, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney  

NOTE:  Order accepting Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 01/18/24.

COURT:  Recktenwald, C.J., McKenna, Eddins, Ginoza, and Devens, JJ.

Brief Description:

John Sing was charged with Robbery in the Second Degree under Hawai‘i Revised Statutes § 708-841(1)(a).  His indictment alleged that in November 2019 “while in the course of committing theft, [Sing] did use force against . . . a person who was present, with the intent to overcome [that person’s] physical resistance or physical power of resistance.”

At trial, the circuit court instructed the jury on Robbery in the Second Degree and Attempted Robbery in the Second Degree.  The jury did not convict Sing of Robbery in the Second Degree but convicted him of Attempted Robbery in the Second Degree. 

Sing appealed to the Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA).  He argued that the trial court erred by instructing the jury on the Attempted Robbery in the Second Degree and that his conviction for Attempted Robbery in the Second Degree was not supported by sufficient evidence.  The State argued that his conviction should be affirmed because the circuit court properly instructed the jury on Attempted Robbery in the Second Degree.

The ICA affirmed Sing’s conviction, holding that Attempted Robbery is an included offense of Robbery.

Sing now asks this court to reverse his conviction, arguing that Attempted Robbery in the Second Degree is not a cognizable crime, or alternatively, there was insufficient evidence at trial to support his conviction of Attempted Robbery in the Second Degree.