Case Title: State v. Hodges

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: hawaii

Court: Hawaii Supreme Court

Date: 2005-05-27T00:00:00Z

Document:
s** NOT FOR PUBLICATION ***
no. 26749

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAT'T

S002

STATE OF HAWAI'I, Plaintiff-Appellee, 5)

HAROLD TOMLIN HODGES, Defendant-Appellant gel

 
 

NEG IY LZ ANH!

APPEAL FROM THE SECOND CIRCUIT COURT
(CR. NO. 04-1-0064(1))

w u yRDEI
(py: Moon, C.J., Levinson, Nakayama, Acoba, and Duffy, JJ.)

 

‘The appellant Harold Tomlin Hodges appeals fron the
guly 7, 2004 judgment of the circuit court of the second circuit,
the Honorable Joel £. August presiding, convicting him of and
sentencing him for the following offenses: 1) promoting @
controlled substance in, on, or near schools, school vehicles, or
public parks (Count I), in violation of Hawaii Revised Statutes
(uRs) § 712-1249.6(2) (b) (Supp. 2003); 2) prohibited acts related
to drug paraphernalia (Count II), in violation of HRS § 239-
43.5(a) (1993); and 3) promoting a detrimental drug in the third
degree, in violation of HRS § 712-1249 (1993).

on appeal, Hodges argues that the circuit court erred
by 1) instructing the jury that the criminal state of mind
required for a finding of guilt under HRS § 712-1249.6 vas
“reckless disregard,” when the statute clearly states that the
Defendant must act “knowingly,” and 2) finding that he knowingly
distributed or possessed with intent to distribute a controlled
substance, in any amount, within 750 feet of real property
comprising a public or private elementary or secondary school.

Hodges argues that there was insufficient evidence to support his

aa
 

*** NOT FOR PUBLICATION
conviction for the offense of promoting a controlled substance
near a school, as charged in Count I. Hodges does not challenge

his convictions on Counts II and IIT.

 

The State of Hawai'i (hereinafter, “the prosecution”:
concedes that the circuit court committed plain error by 1)
erroneously instructing the jury that the requisite state of mind
for the attendant circumstance for promoting a controlled
substance near a school was either “knowing” or “reckless,” and
2) by denying Hodges’s motion for judgment of acquittal because
there was insufficient evidence to support a conviction for the
charge.

We conclude that the prosecution's confession of error
is supported by the record and is well-founded in law. See State
vs Wasson, 76 Hawai'i 415, 418, 879 2.24 520, 523 (1994);
Territory v. Kogami, 37 Haw, 174, 175 (1945). Therefore,

IT 18 HEREBY ORDERED that the circuit court’s judgment
of conviction in Count I for promoting a controlled substance
near a school in violation of HRS § 712-1249.6 is reversed. The
circuit court’s judgment with respect to Counts It and IIT is
affimed.

DATE!
on the briefs:

Kellen Kenji Akamu, Ee - :
deputy public defender,
for the appellant Resse CON eta Ce

Harold Tomlin Hodges
prosecuting attorney, Wane Sus th

for the plaintiff-appellee
State of Hawai'i

Honolulu, Hawai'i, May 27, 2005.