Court Opinion

ID: 9945875
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-28 18:04:48.793718+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:23:13.368064
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

                                                 Electronically Filed
                                                 Intermediate Court of Appeals
                                                 CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
                                                 28-FEB-2024
                                                 07:40 AM
                                                 Dkt. 50 SO

                          NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

                IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

                        OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

               STATE OF HAWAI#I, Plaintiff-Appellee,
                                 v.
              MARK ANTHONY SEINA, Defendant-Appellant

         APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                   (CRIMINAL NO. 1CPC-XX-XXXXXXX)

                    SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER
  (By: Leonard, Acting Chief Judge, Hiraoka and Wadsworth, JJ.)

           Defendant-Appellant Mark Anthony Seina (Seina) appeals

from the May 4, 2023 Judgment of Conviction and Sentence; Notice

of Entry (Judgment) entered by the Circuit Court of the First

Circuit (Circuit Court).1

           Plaintiff-Appellee State of Hawai‘i (State) charged

Seina with two counts:     (1) Place to Keep Pistol or Revolver, in

violation of Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 134-25 (2011); and

(2) Ownership or Possession Prohibited of any Firearm or

Ammunition by a Person Convicted of Certain Crimes, in violation

of HRS §§ 134-7(b) and (h) (2011).        After a jury-waived trial,

Seina was found guilty on both counts.         On the issue of merger,

     1
           The Honorable Shirley M. Kawamura presided.
  NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

the State elected to proceed on Count 2.        Seina was sentenced to

a ten-year term of imprisonment, to run concurrently with any

other sentence, and with credit for time served.

          Seina raises a single point of error on appeal,

contending that the Circuit Court erred in denying his June 6,

2022 Motion to Suppress Evidence and Statements (Motion to

Suppress), and his renewed oral motion at trial.

          Upon careful review of the record and the briefs

submitted by the parties, and having given due consideration to
the arguments advanced and the issues raised by the parties, we

address Seina's point of error as follows:

          Seina argues that Honolulu Police Department (HPD)

officers lacked probable cause to arrest him for Unauthorized

Control of Propelled Vehicle (UCPV), in violation of HRS § 708-

836 (2014), because Seina was the registered owner of the subject

motorcycle.2

          The Hawai‘i Supreme Court has held:
                Probable cause exists when the facts and circumstances
          within one's knowledge and of which one has reasonably
          trustworthy information are sufficient in themselves to
          warrant a person of reasonable caution to believe that an
          offense has been committed. This requires more than a mere
          suspicion but less than a certainty. This standard has two
          components. The first sentence describes the standard for

     2
          HRS § 708-836 provides in pertinent part:
                § 708-836 Unauthorized control of propelled vehicle.
          (1) A person commits the offense of unauthorized control of
          a propelled vehicle if the person intentionally or knowingly
          exerts unauthorized control over another's propelled vehicle
          by operating propelled vehicle without the owner's consent
          or by changing the identity of the propelled vehicle without
          the owner's consent.
                . . . .
                (5) Unauthorized control of a propelled vehicle is a
          class C felony.

                                    2
  NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

          determining the presence of probable cause. The second
          sentence describes the quantum of proof necessary to satisfy
          the standard.

 State v. Maganis, 109 Hawai‘i 84, 86, 123 P.3d 679, 681 (2005)

(internal citations omitted); see also HRS § 803-5 (1993).3

          Probable cause "requires more than a mere suspicion but

less than a certainty."     Maganis, 109 Hawai#i at 86, 123 P.3d at

681 (citations omitted).     It is a practical concept that balances

a citizen's rights with the needs of law enforcement.           Id. at 87-

88, 123 P.3d at 682-83.     The standard for probable cause allows

for officers to make some mistakes in determining they have

probable cause to arrest a citizen, but "the mistakes must be

those of reasonable [persons], acting on facts leading sensibly

to their conclusions of probability."       Id.

          Here, after noticing the motorcycle driven by Seina had

an expired safety check decal, HPD Corporal Gerald Agbulos

(Corporal Agbulos) ran the license plate and learned that it was

reported as a stolen vehicle.      After placing Seina in

investigative detention, Corporal Agbulos then checked the VIN

number of the motorcycle and confirmed that it matched the stolen
motorcycle.   Corporal Agbulos read the written police report on

     3
          HRS § 803-5 provides:

                § 803-5 By police officer without warrant. (a) A officer
          or other officer of justice, may, without warrant, arrest and
          detain for examination any person when the officer has probable
          cause to believe that such person has committed any offense,
          whether in the officer's presence or otherwise.
                (b) For purposes of this section, a police officer has
          probable cause to make an arrest when the facts and circumstances
          within the officer's knowledge and of which the officer has
          reasonably trustworthy information are sufficient in themselves to
          warrant a person of reasonable caution in the belief that a crime
          has been or is being committed.

                                    3
  NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

his laptop, wherein another HPD officer reported that complainant

Jonathan Cortez (Cortez) reported the theft of a motorcycle from

the parking structure where Cortez lived, shortly after Cortez

purchased it.   HPD Officer Aubry Kaluhiokalani (Officer

Kaluhiokalani), who made the police report, testified that he

took Cortez's report.    Cortez told the officer that he just

bought the motorcycle from Seina, Seina had driven the motorcycle

to the parking structure, and the motorcycle was stolen later the

same day.   Officer Kaluhiokalani also spoke to a security guard
who told him that after Cortez reported the theft to security,

the guard reviewed the surveillance video, saw a car drive into

the structure, and saw a man get out of the car, approach the

motorcycle and take off with it.       A female in the car drove off

behind the motorcycle.

            When asked by the court why he arrested Seina knowing

that Seina was the registered owner of the motorcycle, Corporal

Agbulos testified that he understood from the report that Seina

sold or transferred the motorcycle to another person and then

took it back without that person's permission.      Based on this

information, Seina was placed under arrest and patted down.
            Seina contends that the stolen vehicle report filed by

Cortez did not provide probable cause for Seina's arrest for UCPV

because the police should not have accepted Cortez's

representations and handwritten bill of sale as proof of

ownership because the requirements for legal transfer of title

had not been met.

                                   4
  NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

           We conclude that the police report available to

Corporal Agbulos on his HPD laptop – stating that a motorcycle

was stolen of the same description as the vehicle driven by Seina

including color, license plate number, and VIN – was reasonably

trustworthy information sufficient to warrant a person of

reasonable caution to believe that an offense involving that

motorcycle had been committed.    In addition, the police report

noted that Seina had been identified as a suspect.      The facts and

circumstances within Corporal Agbulos's personal knowledge
included that Seina was operating that motorcycle.      Viewing as a

whole all of the facts and circumstances available to Corporal

Agbulos, we conclude that probable cause to arrest Seina for UCPV

existed.

           As we have concluded that there was probable cause to

arrest Seina, we conclude that Seina's argument that his post-

arrest statements were fruit of the poisonous tree is without

merit.

           For these reasons, the Circuit Court's May 4, 2023

Judgment is affirmed.

           DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, February 28, 2024.

On the briefs:                        /s/ Katherine G. Leonard
                                      Acting Chief Judge
Randall K. Hironaka,
(Miyoshi & Hironaka, LLLC),           /s/ Keith K. Hiraoka
for Defendant-Appellant.              Associate Judge

Robert T. Nakatsuji,                  /s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth
Deputy Prosecuting Attorney,          Associate Judge
City and County of Honolulu,
for Plaintiff-Appellee.

                                  5