Opinion ID: 2778011
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Pari Materia

Text: “Laws in pari materia, or upon the same subject matter, shall be construed with reference to each other. What is clear in one statute may be called upon in aid to explain what is doubtful in another.” State v. Kamanʻo, 118 Hawaiʻi 210, 218, 188 P.3d 724, 732 (2008); see also HRS § 1-16 (1993). The offense of electronic enticement of a child in the second degree, HRS § 707-757 (Supp. 2013), which concerns the same subject matter as the first degree offense, HRS § 707-756, is defined as:
electronic device:

under the age of eighteen years;
of the risk that the other person is under the age of eighteen years, and the other person is under the age of eighteen years; or
person to be under the age of eighteen years; and
commission of a felony, agrees to meet with the minor, or with another person who represents that person to be a minor under the age of eighteen years; and 16 If the felonious intent also applied to the travel element, then its abandonment during the travel element would not permit the offense to be charged, even if that actor again changed his or her mind upon meeting the Minor. - 23 - FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
agreed upon meeting place at the agreed upon meeting time . . . . HRS § 707-757 (emphasis added). HRS § 707-757 directly links the felonious intent with the agreement element. Because HRS §§ 707-756 and 707-757 are manifestly in pari materia, the clarity with which HRS § 707-757 connects the felonious intent to the agreement element buttresses the conclusion that the intent of the legislature was to assign the felonious intent to the agreement element only. Therefore, in light of the plain language of HRS § 707-756, its legislative history, and the doctrine of in pari materia, we conclude that the “intent to promote or facilitate the commission of a felony” set forth in the agreement element applies to that element only.