Opinion ID: 871219
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: If the requested documents contain

Text: confidential information or were filed under seal, they should be submitted to the appellate court under seal. (Emphases added.) The record was supplemented with additional documents, filed under seal, on November 18, 2010. On November 24, 2010, a majority of the three-judge ICA panel affirmed the court. The ICA majority concluded that the “court's finding that [Petitioner] ‘failed to comply with a substantial requirement imposed as a condition of [probation]’ . . . was not clearly erroneous, as there is substantial evidence in the record to support this finding.” 2010 WL 4814111, at . The majority decided that Petitioner’s “premature termination” from Charities, “prior to being clinically discharged and without the concurrence of his probation officer, constituted a failure to comply with a substantial requirement of his probation.” Id. The four reasons for Petitioner’s termination, adduced from the revocation hearing, according to the majority, provided evidence that Petitioner’s failure to comply with his terms of probation was inexcusable. Chief Judge Nakamura dissented. In his view, the evidence “reflect[ed] that [Charities] terminated [Petitioner] basically because an attorney friend wrote a letter complaining about certain restrictions imposed on [Petitioner] as part of his treatment.” Id. at  (Nakamura, C.J., dissenting). Thus, 11 FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER Respondent “did not demonstrate that [Petitioner’s] termination from the [Charities’] program was justified.” Id.