Opinion ID: 1196216
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Application of HRE 408 in the Instant Case

Text: Turning to the instant case, if the February 7, 1997 Meeting constituted civil settlement negotiations, then, in accordance with the above, any evidence thereof would be excluded under HRE Rule 408, unless the evidence constituted an attempt by the accused to avoid criminal prosecution. Defendant argues that the meeting constituted settlement negotiations and was, therefore, inadmissible under Rule 408. The circuit court did not inquire or determine whether the Aunt's or Cousin's statements were made in an effort to compromise potential civil liability. However, based on the prosecution's offer of proof at the motion in limine hearing, the circuit court characterized the statements made at the meeting as an offer of money in exchange for dropping criminal charges that Defendant then adopted by allegedly nodding his head. [6] If the statements made constituted an offer of payment in an attempt to avoid prosecution, then the evidence thereof would not be excluded under HRE Rule 408. However, because Defendant in this case did not make a direct offer but remained silent for most of the meeting and then shook his head, allegedly in agreement when the offer was being made to Father, we must examine whether Defendant's nonverbal conduct may have constituted an adoption of his aunt's or cousin's statements under HRE Rule 803.