Opinion ID: 2514968
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: Whether the Circuit Court's Raising of the Validity of Heggland's Prior Conviction Shifted the Burden of Proof to the Prosecution.

Text: Heggland's contention that the prosecution was required to establish sufficient evidence to convince the court of the counseled nature of his prior Colorado conviction because the circuit court raised the issue is wholly without merit. As the ICA's opinion makes clear, the circuit court misinterpreted the five-step procedure outlined in Sinagoga by requiring the prosecution to prove the validity of Heggland's prior conviction in the absence of a good-faith challenge by Heggland. [11] If the defendant contends that one or more of the reported prior criminal convictions was ... uncounseled ... the defendant shall, prior to the sentencing, respond with a good faith challenge on the record stating, as to each challenged conviction, the basis or bases for the challenge.  Sinagoga, 81 Hawai`i at 447, 918 P.2d at 254 (emphases added). As Heggland failed to make such a good-faith challenge, the ICA did not err in concluding that the circuit court erred in denying the prosecution's motion on this ground.