Opinion ID: 4542551
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: sufficiency of the evidence

Text: Appellate courts review the sufficiency of the evidence at trial for “substantial evidence.” State v. Kalaola, 124 Hawaiʻi 43, 49, 237 P.3d 1109, 1115 (2010). Substantial evidence in this context is defined as “credible evidence which is of sufficient quality and probative value to enable a person of reasonable caution to support a conclusion.” Id. Evidence adduced in the trial court must be considered in the strongest light for the prosecution when the appellate court passes on the legal sufficiency of such evidence to support a conviction. State v. Batson, 73 Haw. 236, 248, 831 P.2d 924, 931 (1992). C. Fifth Amendment Privilege Against Self-Incrimination “Whether a trial court should compel a witness to testify over the witness’s assertion that his answer might tend to incriminate him or her is a matter within the sound exercise of its discretion, and is thus reviewed for an abuse of discretion.” State v. Kupihea, 80 Hawaiʻi 307, 312, 909 P.2d 1122, 1127 (1996) (citation omitted). D. Jury Instructions The propriety of jury instructions, or their omission, is a question of law reviewed de novo using the following standard: “[w]hether, when read and considered as a whole, the instructions given are prejudicially insufficient, erroneous, inconsistent, or misleading.” State v. Bovee, 139 Hawaiʻi 530, 24 FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER 537, 394 P.3d 760, 767 (2017) (quoting State v. Frisbee, 114 Hawaiʻi 76, 79, 156 P.3d 1182, 1185 (2007)); Kobashigawa v. Silva, 129 Hawaiʻi 313, 320, 300 P.3d 579, 586 (2013).