Opinion ID: 4543687
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Detective Walter Ah Mow’s Testimony

Text: The State called retired Hawaii Police Department (HPD) Detective Walter Ah Mow (Detective Ah Mow). Detective 1 The Honorable Melvin H. Fujino presided. 4  FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER  Ah Mow worked for the Criminal Investigation Section in Kona in 2016 and was assigned to the “assault investigation” that is the subject of this appeal. He testified that Beaudet-Close became a person of interest after a witness identified Beaudet-Close as the assailant. Detective Ah Mow stated that on November 7, 2016, he interviewed Beaudet-Close, who had already turned himself in for the assault and was confined to a cellblock. Detective Ah Mow video recorded the interview. According to Detective Ah Mow, Beaudet-Close told him that on the night of the incident, Ault had brandished a knife. Detective Ah Mow testified that Beaudet-Close’s statement did not make sense and that he was never able to corroborate Beaudet-Close’s assertion that Ault had brandished a knife. Detective Ah Mow stated, “[t]here was no knife involved.” Detective Ah Mow explained that he advised BeaudetClose of his “rights regarding the making or not making of a statement . . . [and] his rights regarding an attorney” using the standard Hawaii Police Department Advice of Rights form (Advice of Rights Form). Detective Ah Mow read the Advice of Rights Form to Beaudet-Close, who initialed it in various places. Beaudet-Close’s initials and verbal statements indicated that he understood the Advice of Rights Form, that he waived his right to an attorney, and that he was willing to 5  FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER  answer questions and to make a statement. The State moved a copy of the Advice of Rights Form into evidence. The State then moved to place Exhibit 13A, a copy of the police interview video, into evidence. Beaudet-Close objected as to foundation and on Hawaiʿi Rules of Evidence (HRE) Rule 4032 grounds. The circuit court overruled those objections in the following exchange: [BEAUDET-CLOSE’S COUNSEL]: Uh, just as to foundation, Your Honor, I don’t know – I haven’t reviewed that disc but otherwise that’s my objection. THE COURT: Court will receive 13A. . . . . [BEAUDET-CLOSE’S COUNSEL]: And if I could, Your Honor, I also object to 13A on 403 prior to publication. THE COURT: Overruled. The State published the video to the jury.