Oral Argument before the Hawaii Supreme Court — SCWC-20-0000481
No. SCWC-20-0000481, Thursday, March 17, 2022, 10 a.m.
STATE OF HAWAIʻI, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. JONATHAN S. VADEN, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant.
The above-captioned case has been set for oral argument on the merits at:
Supreme Court Courtroom
Aliʻiolani Hale, 2nd Floor
417 South King Street
Honolulu, HI 96813
The oral argument will also be livestreamed for public viewing via the Judiciary’s YouTube channel at YouTube.com/hawaiicourts.
Attorney for Petitioner:
Benjamin E. Lowenthal, Deputy Public Defender
Attorney for Respondent:
Richard B. Rost, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
NOTE: Order accepting Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 02/24/22.
COURT: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.
After spending several months in jail, Jonathan S. Vaden entered no contest pleas in five unrelated criminal cases, including Case No. 2CPC-18-0000844 (this case). In each of the five cases, the Circuit Court of the Second Circuit sentenced him to probation with a discretionary condition that he serve jail time. All probation terms were to run concurrently.
Vaden later petitioned for admission into the Maui Drug Court Program. The Maui Drug Court approved the petition; it resentenced him to new probation terms with a special condition that he successfully complete the drug court program. Soon after, Vaden was released from custody.
A few months later, Vaden was detained again and terminated from the drug court program. The circuit court revoked his probation. It resentenced him to a ten-year term of imprisonment in this case and a five-year term of imprisonment in his other four cases. The ten-year term was to run consecutively to the five-year term. The court ordered credit for time served.
Vaden moved to correct his detention credit accrued in this case under Hawaiʻi Revised Statues (HRS) § 706-671. He claimed that he had been imprisoned for 340 days before resentencing; yet the Department of Public Safety only awarded him one-day credit in this case. Though the 340-day credit was applied to the 5-year sentence, Vaden asked the court to also deduct 340 days from the 10-year sentence in this case.
The circuit court denied his motion. The ICA affirmed. Both relied on State v. Tauiliili, 96 Hawaiʻi 195, 29 P.3d 914 (2001).
On certiorari, Vaden argues the ICA misapplied Tauiliili. He asserts that the ICA improperly erased his credit and added 340 days to his ten-year sentence in this case.