Opinion ID: 2584196
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: The motions for a mistrial and to withdraw and Plichta's testimony on redirect

Text: Plichta's counsel moved for a mistrial and to withdraw so that she could testify on Plichta's behalf that his testimony regarding his beliefs in aliens was not a recent fabrication, but was instead consistent with statements that he had previously made to her shortly after he was arrested. Counsel asserted that Plichta was denied a chance to present his defense and the credibility of his defense and [that] his statements are being attacked with no counterattack and no ability to prove that it's not the first time he's said these things. Counsel further argued that, at minimum, she should be allowed to ask Plichta, [W]hen did you first tell [someone] about [your concerns regarding aliens] and who did you tell[?] According to counsel, Plichta's prior consistent statements would be admissible under Hawai`i Rules of Evidence (HRE) Rule 613. [9] The prosecution argued that Plichta's counsel could not make herself a witness because her motion was untimely and she should have confirmed with Plichta or the examiners whether Plichta had told the examiners about his beliefs in aliens. With respect to Plichta's counsel's request to question Plichta regarding his prior consistent statements to her, the prosecution asserted that: [I]f the Court rules that [Plichta's counsel is] permitted to ask [Plichta] what he told counsel, . . . that should be where it ends. And counsel can't consider it and can't say anything more [than] what [Plichta] said. . . . But . . . if the Court rules she can ask him[and] he can say I told you, [counsel], then that's where inquiry should end[,] at that point. Agreeing with the prosecution, the circuit court denied both the motion for a mistrial and the motion to withdraw. With respect to the motion to withdraw, the circuit court stated to defense counsel that she would be allowed to ask [Plichta] if he made prior consistent statements and I agree with [the prosecution] that you can't be a witness in this trial. Based on the circuit court's ruling, Plichta's counsel elicited the following testimony from Plichta: Q. Now, you were asked by [the prosecution] . . . why you didn't tell the doctor the things that you told the jury. Have you ever previously told anyone those things? A. Yes. Q. And who was that? A. I told you. Q. All right. . . . I have no further questions. Thank you. (Formatting altered.)