Oral Argument Before the Hawaii Supreme Court–SCWC-20-0000457Posted on Jan 13, 2023 in Uncategorized
No. SCWC-20-0000457, Thursday, January 12, 2023, 2 p.m.
STATE OF HAWAIʻI, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. LOGOVII TALO, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant.
The above-captioned case has been set for oral argument on the merits at:
Supreme Court Courtroom
Aliʻiōlani Hale, 2nd Floor
417 South King Street
Honolulu, HI 96813
The oral argument will also be livestreamed for public viewing via Olelo Community Television and the Judiciary’s YouTube channel at YouTube.com/hawaiicourts.
Attorney for Petitioner Logovii Talo:
Jon N. Ikenaga, Deputy Public Defender
Attorney for Respondent State of Hawaiʻi:
Loren J. Thomas, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
NOTE: Certification of Recusal, by Associate Justice Paula A. Nakayama, filed 08/29/22.
NOTE: Order assigning Circuit Judge Clarissa Y. Malinao, in place of Nakayama, J., recused, filed 09/16/22.
NOTE: Order accepting Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 10/11/22.
COURT: Recktenwald, C.J., McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ., and Circuit Judge Malinao, in place of Nakayama, J., recused.
In 2016, the State charged Logovii Talo (“Talo”) with felony second-degree assault. After Talo pleaded no contest, he was sentenced to probation for four years with certain terms and conditions, including that: (1) Talo could not own or possess any firearms or ammunition; and (2) Talo could be subjected to a warrantless search of his person, residence, and vehicle based on reasonable suspicion that illicit substance(s) or contraband may be found (“Condition Q”). In 2019, the Adult Probation Division executed a warrantless search of Talo’s residence and found a firearm and ammunition.
During the hearing on the State’s motion to revoke Talo’s probation, Talo moved to suppress the evidence resulting from the warrantless search of his residence, arguing the search was unreasonable. The circuit court denied the motion and re-sentenced Talo to a five-year term of imprisonment. The Intermediate Court of Appeals (“ICA”) affirmed. On certiorari, Talo asks (1) whether the ICA gravely erred in holding that the warrantless search of Talo’s residence was not unreasonable; and (2) whether the ICA gravely erred in holding that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Talo to a five-year term of imprisonment.
The court also ordered supplemental briefing regarding whether the imposition of Condition Q was consistent with Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes (“HRS”) § 706-624(2) (2016) and this court’s holding in State v. Kahawai, 103 Hawaiʻi 462, 462-63, 83 P.3d 725, 725-26 (2004) (“We hold that a sentencing court may not impose discretionary conditions of probation pursuant to [HRS] § 706-624(2) (1993) unless there is a factual basis in the record indicating that such conditions ‘are reasonably related to the factors set forth in [HRS §] 706-606’ and insofar as such ‘conditions involve only deprivations of liberty or property[,]’ that they ‘are reasonably necessary for the purposes indicated in [HRS §] 706-606(2)[.]’ HRS § 706-624(2).”).