reglab/housing_qa huggingface dataset:
HI Rev Stat § 710-1029 (2021)
2021 Hawaii Revised Statutes|Title 37. Hawaii Penal Code|710. Offenses Against Public Administration|710-1029 Hindering prosecution in the first degree.

  §710-1029 Hindering prosecution in the first degree. (1) A person commits the offense of hindering prosecution in the first degree if, with the intent to hinder the apprehension, prosecution, conviction, or punishment of another for a class A, B, or C felony or murder in any degree, the person renders assistance to the other person.  (2) Hindering prosecution in the first degree is a class C felony. [L 1972, c 9, pt of §1; am L 1997, c 149, §6] Case Notes  Although there was insufficient evidence to support a conviction for hindering prosecution in the first degree, there was sufficient evidence adduced to convict petitioner of the lesser included offense of hindering prosecution in the second degree under §710-1030; evidence was adduced that petitioner used physical force to prevent the officers from pursuing petitioner's son, the officers were acting under the color of law, and the officers informed petitioner that they were seeking to arrest son, which was sufficient evidence that petitioner was aware of the attendant circumstance that son was being apprehended for "a crime". 121 H. 74, 214 P.3d 613 (2009).  Where there was no evidence presented that petitioner was aware of the attendant circumstance that petitioner's son committed a felony, there was an insufficient basis for petitioner's conviction of a felony under this section. 121 H. 74, 214 P.3d 613 (2009).
HI Rev Stat § 710-1031 (2021)
2021 Hawaii Revised Statutes|Title 37. Hawaii Penal Code|710. Offenses Against Public Administration|710-1031 Intimidating a correctional worker.

  §710-1031 Intimidating a correctional worker. (1) A person commits the offense of intimidation of a correctional worker if the person uses force upon or a threat of force directed to a correctional worker, or the correctional worker's immediate family, with intent to influence such worker's conduct, decision, action or abstention from action as a correctional worker.  (2) "Correctional worker", as used in this section means any employee of the State or any county who works in a correctional or detention facility, a court, a paroling authority or who by law has jurisdiction over any legally committed offender or any person placed on probation or parole.  (3) "Threat" as used in this section means any threat proscribed by section 707-764(1).  (4) Intimidation of a correctional worker is a class B felony. [L 1974, c 196, §1; am L 1980, c 267, §1; gen ch 1993] COMMENTARY ON §710-1031  Act 196, Session Laws 1974, added this section "to provide class B felony sanctions against those persons who, by threat of harm directed to a correctional worker or his immediate family, intend to influence or deter the correctional worker in performing his duties." House Standing Committee Report No. 731-74.  The Committee Report further states: "Your Committee notes that under the present law, threatening correctional personnel would be a violation of §707-715 of the Penal Code entitled 'Terroristic threatening', a misdemeanor, or §707-724 of the Penal Code entitled 'Criminal coercion', a class C felony. Your Committee believes that the nature of the crime is such that it should be classified as a class B felony."
HI Rev Stat § 710-1060 (2021)
2021 Hawaii Revised Statutes|Title 37. Hawaii Penal Code|710. Offenses Against Public Administration|710-1060 Perjury.

  §710-1060 Perjury. (1) A person commits the offense of perjury if in any official proceeding the person makes, under an oath required or authorized by law, a false statement which the person does not believe to be true.  (2) No person shall be convicted under this section unless the court rules that the false statement is a "materially false statement" as defined by section [710-1000]. It is not a defense that the declarant mistakenly believed the false statement to be immaterial.  (3) Perjury is a class C felony. [L 1972, c 9, pt of §1; gen ch 1993] Case Notes  Sufficiency of indictment for perjury. 1 H. App. 510, 620 P.2d 1091 (1980).
HI Rev Stat § 710-1061 (2021)
2021 Hawaii Revised Statutes|Title 37. Hawaii Penal Code|710. Offenses Against Public Administration|710-1061 False swearing in official matters.

  §710-1061 False swearing in official matters. (1) A person commits the offense of false swearing in official matters if the person makes, under an oath required or authorized by law, a false statement which the person does not believe to be true, and:  (a) The statement is made in an official proceeding; or  (b) The statement is intended to mislead a public servant in the performance of the public servant's official duty.  (2) False swearing in official matters is a misdemeanor. [L 1972, c 9, pt of §1; gen ch 1993]
HI Rev Stat § 710-1062 (2021)
2021 Hawaii Revised Statutes|Title 37. Hawaii Penal Code|710. Offenses Against Public Administration|710-1062 False swearing.

  §710-1062 False swearing. (1) A person commits the offense of false swearing if the person makes, under oath required or authorized by law, a false statement which the person does not believe to be true.  (2) False swearing is a petty misdemeanor. [L 1972, c 9, pt of §1; gen ch 1993]
HI Rev Stat § 710-1065 (2021)
2021 Hawaii Revised Statutes|Title 37. Hawaii Penal Code|710. Offenses Against Public Administration|710-1065 Inconsistent statements. §710-1065 Commentary:

  §710-1065 Inconsistent statements. (1) Where a person has made inconsistent statements, each of which if made with the requisite state of mind and under the requisite circumstances would constitute an offense specified in this part, and both statements have been made within the period of the statute of limitations, the prosecution may proceed by setting forth the inconsistent statements in a single count alleging in the alternative that one or the other was false and not believed by the defendant. In such case it shall not be necessary for the prosecution to prove which statement was false; it shall only be necessary for the prosecution to prove:  (a) That one or the other was false and not believed by the defendant to be true; and  (b) The attendant circumstances and states of mind necessary to constitute each statement, if false, as an offense.  (2) The most serious offense of which a person may be convicted in such an instance shall be determined by hypothetically assuming each statement to be false. If offenses of different classes or grades would be established by the making of the two statements, the person may only be convicted of the lesser class or grade. [L 1972, c 9, pt of §1] COMMENTARY ON §710-1065  At common law, no conviction for perjury could be based upon two contradictory sworn statements, even where one of them was obviously intentionally false, unless the prosecution could prove which was the false statement.[1] The common-law rule has suffered much criticism for its apparent logical inconsistency.[2] Moreover, many recent code revisions have rejected the common-law rule.3  Accordingly, the Code adopts §710-1065, allowing prosecution on the basis of the inconsistent statements alone, provided that the requisite circumstances and culpability are also proved. The unwitting maker of contradictory statements will be protected by the requirement that the attendant circumstances and requisite state of mind be proved with regard to each statement. Note also that where two contradictory statements carry different sanctions, the declarant may only be convicted of the lesser offense under this section.  Previous Hawaii law contained no specific provisions for inconsistent statements, nor are there any reported Hawaii cases on this point. __________  §710-1065 Commentary: 1. Regina v. Hughes, 1 Car. & K. 519, 527, 174 Eng. Rep. 919, 923 (1844); see generally Comment, 53 Mich. L. Rev. 1165 (1955); Perkins, Criminal Law 390 (1957). 2. See Young v. United States, 212 F.2d 236, 241, 994 U.S. App. D.C. 54 (1954), cert. denied, 347 U.S. 1015 (1954); United States v. Buckner, 118 F.2d 468 (2d Cir. 1941); A.B.A. Commission on Organized Crime Report, 50-52 (1951). 3. M.P.C. §241.1(5); Ill. Cr. Code §32-2(b); N.Y.R.P.L. §210.20; Prop. Del. Cr. Code §724; Prop. Mich. Rev. Cr. Code §4915.
HI Rev Stat § 710-1067 (2021)
2021 Hawaii Revised Statutes|Title 37. Hawaii Penal Code|710. Offenses Against Public Administration|710-1067 Corroboration. §710-1067 Commentary:

  §710-1067 Corroboration. In any prosecution under this part, except a prosecution based upon inconsistent statements pursuant to section 710-1065, falsity of a statement may not be established solely through contradiction by the testimony of a single witness. [L 1972, c 9, pt of §1] COMMENTARY ON §710-1067  This section forbids convictions for perjury based solely upon the contradictory testimony of a single witness. Either some additional corroborating evidence or the contradictory testimony of an additional witness is needed for conviction.  The rationale for this rule is that the requirement is necessary as a safeguard to induce witnesses to testify freely.[1] Obtaining voluntary testimony in any proceeding would be difficult if the witness might be harassed upon the word of a disappointed litigant.[2] And if the witness were required to testify, it would seem that similar protection ought to be given the witness.  The policy question to be decided, then, is whether the overall protection and encouragement of persons who give statements (in the contexts specified by the offenses in this part) is worth foregoing occasionally the conviction of an apparent falsifier. The Code takes the position that it is. There is also an additional safeguard involved in protecting the innocent person. The protection rests upon the argument that since equally honest persons may well have different recollections of the same events, a conviction for a falsification offense ought not to rest upon the contradiction of two statements. Otherwise, an innocent person would be subject to prosecution every time another person, under oath, disputed the innocent person's recollection.[3]  This section would apply only to a relatively narrow class of cases which would not often be prosecuted. The section operates only where there is no evidence but the testimony of a single contradicting witness. Hence, one may view this section as a special gloss on the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, equivalent to stating that no case of a contradicting statement under oath, without more, can satisfy the general requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt in falsification cases.[4]  The Hawaii case law is that a person accused of perjury may be convicted only upon the testimony of two credible witnesses, or of one credible witness corroborated by other evidence sufficient to satisfy the trier of fact, beyond a reasonable doubt, as to the guilt of the accused.5 Here, the Code is essentially in accord with the Hawaii rule, but codifies it, lends it greater clarity, and extends it to all falsification offenses in this part. __________  §710-1067 Commentary: 1. See United States v. Weiler, 323 U.S. 606 (1944). 2. Prop. Mich. Rev. Cr. Code §4920, comments at 402. 3. See Weiler, supra. 4. Prop. Mich. Rev. Cr. Code, comments at 403. 5. See Territory of Hawaii v. Shite, 43 Haw. 203 (1957).
HI Rev Stat § 710-1069 (2021)
2021 Hawaii Revised Statutes|Title 37. Hawaii Penal Code|710. Offenses Against Public Administration|710-1069 Misrepresenting a notarized document in the first degree.

  §710-1069 Misrepresenting a notarized document in the first degree. (1) A person commits the offense of misrepresenting a notarized document in the first degree if the person submits or invites reliance on a document that the person knows has been altered after the document had been notarized by a notary public in this or any other jurisdiction, and:  (a) The offense was committed with intent to mislead a public servant; or  (b) The offense was committed for purpose of commercial or private financial gain.  (2) Misrepresenting a notarized document in the first degree is a class C felony. [L 2008, c 175, pt of §3]
HI Rev Stat § 710-1069.5 (2021)
2021 Hawaii Revised Statutes|Title 37. Hawaii Penal Code|710. Offenses Against Public Administration|710-1069.5 Misrepresenting a notarized document in the second degree.

 §710-1069.5 Misrepresenting a notarized document in the second degree. (1) A person commits the offense of misrepresenting a notarized document in the second degree if, with intent to mislead another, the person submits or invites reliance on a document that the person knows has been altered after the document had been notarized by a notary public in this or any other jurisdiction.  (2) Misrepresenting a notarized document in the second degree is a misdemeanor. [L 2008, c 175, pt of §3] COMMENTARY ON § §710-1069 AND 710-1069.5  Act 175, Session Laws 2008, added these sections, establishing criminal offenses for misrepresenting a notarized document. Act 175 deterred fraud by strengthening the laws relating to notaries and notarized documents. Conference Committee Report No. 77-08.
HI Rev Stat § 710-1071 (2021)
2021 Hawaii Revised Statutes|Title 37. Hawaii Penal Code|710. Offenses Against Public Administration|710-1071 Intimidating a witness.

  §710-1071 Intimidating a witness. (1) A person commits the offense of intimidating a witness if he uses force upon or a threat directed to a witness or a person he believes is about to be called as a witness in any official proceeding, with intent to:  (a) Influence the testimony of that person;  (b) Induce that person to avoid legal process summoning him to testify; or  (c) Induce that person to absent himself from an official proceeding to which he has been legally summoned.  (2) "Threat" as used in this section means any threat proscribed by section 707-764(1).  (3) Intimidating a witness is a class C felony. [L 1972, c 9, pt of §1; am L 1980, c 267, §2] COMMENTARY ON §710-1071  The potential for harm involved in witness intimidation is essentially similar to that involved in the offense of bribery of a witness, e.g., the undermining of the integrity of an extremely important part of the judicial process. The definition of the offense also parallels that of bribery of a witness, and the sanctions are identical. Note, however, that only the person who directs the force or threat against the witness is guilty of a crime. "Threat," as used in this section is any threat proscribed by the offense of criminal coercion under §707-724. To some extent, it would seem that the section on criminal coercion might suffice to deal with witness intimidation, but since the intimidation of a witness carries the additional harm of interfering with an official proceeding, it seems appropriate to impose a more severe sanction for the present offense.  Previous Hawaii law had no provisions dealing specifically with the offense of witness intimidation. Case Notes  Terroristic threatening not a lesser included offense of intimidating a witness within the meaning of §701-109(4)(a); multiple conviction of terroristic threatening and intimidating a witness not barred by §701-109(4)(c). 75 H. 517, 865 P.2d 157 (1994).  Sufficient evidence that defendant directed threats to person whom defendant believed was about to be called as a witness where defendant phoned person soon after explicit warning from police officer that such conduct could be inferred as intimidating a witness. 82 H. 419 (App.), 922 P.2d 1032 (1996).  Sufficient evidence that defendant intended to influence person's testimony by making threatening statements during phone call. 82 H. 419 (App.), 922 P.2d 1032 (1996).
HI Rev Stat § 710-1072 (2021)
2021 Hawaii Revised Statutes|Title 37. Hawaii Penal Code|710. Offenses Against Public Administration|710-1072 Tampering with a witness. §710-1072 Commentary:

  §710-1072 Tampering with a witness. (1) A person commits the offense of tampering with a witness if he intentionally engages in conduct to induce a witness or a person he believes is about to be called as a witness in any official proceeding to:  (a) Testify falsely or withhold any testimony which he is not privileged to withhold; or  (b) Absent himself from any official proceeding to which he has been legally summoned.  (2) Tampering with a witness is a misdemeanor. [L 1972, c 9, pt of §1] COMMENTARY ON §710-1072  The social harm dealt with in this section is the same as that dealt with in the prior two sections, however, the means specified in the definition of this offense (i.e., conduct intended to induce) are not as culpable as in the former sections, hence tampering with a witness is only graded as a misdemeanor. A person who attempts to affect testimony, or the absence of it, by, e.g., persuasion or trickery, as opposed to bribery or intimidation, does not commit an offense grave enough to be condemned as a felony. However, unlike the sections on witness bribery and intimidation,[1] an attempt to induce a prospective witness to avoid process is not made an offense: this is because neither the means nor the end is illegal in itself.2  Previous Hawaii law recognized no offense equivalent to tampering with a witness. And, though it is conceivable that such conduct could have been penalized under the general contempt power of the court, there appear no reported cases on the point. __________  §710-1072 Commentary: 1. § §710-1070 and 1071, respectively. 2. Prop. Mich. Rev. Cr. Code, comments at 414.
HI Rev Stat § 710-1072.2 (2021)
2021 Hawaii Revised Statutes|Title 37. Hawaii Penal Code|710. Offenses Against Public Administration|710-1072.2 Retaliating against a witness.

  §710-1072.2 Retaliating against a witness. (1) A person commits the offense of retaliating against a witness if the person uses force upon or threatens a witness or another person or damages the property of a witness or another person because of the attendance of the witness, or any testimony given, or any record, document, or other object produced, by the witness in an official proceeding.  (2) "Threaten" as used in this section means any threat proscribed by sections 707-764(1) and 707-764(2).  (3) Retaliating against a witness is a class C felony. [L 1981, c 156, pt of §1; gen ch 1993] COMMENTARY ON §710-1072.2  Act 156, Session Laws 1981, enacted this section to provide additional protection to witnesses. Although the prior law penalized force or threats used against a person about to be called as a witness, it had no provisions dealing specifically with the offense of force or threats directed against a person for having served as a witness.
HI Rev Stat § 710-1072.5 (2021)
2021 Hawaii Revised Statutes|Title 37. Hawaii Penal Code|710. Offenses Against Public Administration|710-1072.5 Obstruction of justice.

  §710-1072.5 Obstruction of justice. (1) A person commits the offense of obstruction of justice if the person intentionally engages in the following conduct: When called as a witness and having been granted immunity pursuant to chapters 480 and 621C before or after having been qualified as a witness, shall refuse to testify or be qualified as a witness when duly directed to testify or be qualified as a witness.  (2) Obstruction of justice is a class C felony. [L 1978, c 211, §1; am L 1980, c 173, §7; gen ch 1993] COMMENTARY ON §710-1072.5  Act 211, Session Laws 1978, added this section to provide for the situation where a person refuses to testify or be qualified as a witness after having been granted immunity, as distinguished from the situation where, under §710-1077(h), a person refuses to testify or be qualified as a witness without a grant of immunity. Senate Conference Committee Report No. 57-78, House Conference Committee Report No. 56.  Act 173, Session Laws 1980, added the reference to chapter 480 in view of the amendments to that chapter regarding immunity.
HI Rev Stat § 710-1073 (2021)
2021 Hawaii Revised Statutes|Title 37. Hawaii Penal Code|710. Offenses Against Public Administration|710-1073 Bribery of or by a juror.

  §710-1073 Bribery of or by a juror. (1) A person commits the offense of bribing a juror if the person confers, or offers or agrees to confer, directly or indirectly, any benefit upon a juror with intent to influence the juror's vote, opinion, decision, or other action as a juror.  (2) A person is guilty of the offense of bribe receiving by a juror if the person intentionally solicits, accepts, or agrees to accept, directly or indirectly, any benefit as consideration which will influence the person's vote, opinion, decision, or other action as a juror.  (3) The offenses defined in this section are class C felonies. [L 1972, c 9, pt of §1; gen ch 1993]
HI Rev Stat § 710-1074 (2021)
2021 Hawaii Revised Statutes|Title 37. Hawaii Penal Code|710. Offenses Against Public Administration|710-1074 Intimidating a juror.

  §710-1074 Intimidating a juror. (1) A person commits the offense of intimidating a juror if the person uses force or a threat with intent to influence a juror's vote, opinion, decision, or other action as a juror.  (2) "Threat" as used in this section means any threat proscribed by section 707-764(1).  (3) Intimidating a juror is a class B felony. [L 1972, c 9, pt of §1; am L 1980, c 267, §3; gen ch 1993]
HI Rev Stat § 710-1075.5 (2021)
2021 Hawaii Revised Statutes|Title 37. Hawaii Penal Code|710. Offenses Against Public Administration|710-1075.5 Retaliating against a juror.

  §710-1075.5 Retaliating against a juror. (1) A person commits the offense of retaliating against a juror if the person uses force upon or threatens a juror or another person because of the vote, opinion, decision, or other action of the juror in an official proceeding.  (2) "Threaten" as used in this section means any threat proscribed in sections 707-764(1) and 707-764(2).  (3) Retaliating against a juror is a class C felony. [L 1981, c 156, pt of §1; gen ch 1993] COMMENTARY ON §710-1075.5  Act 156, Session Laws 1981, enacted this section to provide additional protection to jurors. Although the prior law penalized force or threats used against a juror before or during a trial, it contained no provision dealing specifically with the offense of force or threats directed against a person for the person's actions as a juror, after the trial.