Opinion ID: 2584235
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Coulter's Due Process Claim

Text: In his Application, Coulter separately challenges the March 2003 and December 2003 actions of the HPA, alleging that both were in violation of his due process rights. The challenges he mounts are based on three grounds: constitutional due process protections; violation of the HPA's own guidelines; and violations of the statutory procedural requirements. Although Coulter raises separate challenges to each of the two HPA actions, they are factually linked. Coulter asserts that the first violation was committed by the HPA board as composed on March 11, 2003, which issued the March 15, 2003 minimum-term order that failed to specify either the level of punishment or the significant criteria upon which the decision was based, both of which must be specified according to Section III of HPA's 1989 Guidelines. This failure, Coulter maintains, violated his due process rights. The second violation was allegedly committed by the HPA board as composed on December 31, 2003, when it issued the Amended Ordermaintaining the term decision but providing the level of punishment and significant criteria informationwithout providing the normal procedures set out in HRS § 706-669, such as notice and a hearing. Although the amended decision could be considered a cure of the conclusory March Order, Coulter contends that because the membership of the HPA completely changed in the interim, the decision was in reality a new decision for which he was entitled to another hearing under HRS § 706-669. As an alternative, Coulter argues that the mere fact that the HPA Board completely changed composition between the original and amended orders effected a violation of Coulter's due process rights. In support of this argument Coulter asserts that the new HPA Board had no basis to provide the justification for the decision of the original, March HPA Board, in the absence of a showing that it considered the evidence adduced at the March hearing before issuing the December Amended Order. [3]