ICA affirms harassment conviction

On June 16, 2011, the Hawai'i Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA) issued its opinion in State v. Tapanan, No. 30445 (Summary Disposition Order-unpublished, panel: Nakamura, CJ, Fujise and Ginoza, JJ). This was an appeal from the Circuit Court of the First Circuit, Hon. Darryl Y.C. Choy presiding. On the briefs were Deputy Public Defender Melinda K. Yamaga, Esq. for Defendant-Appellant and Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Anne K. Clarkin, Esq. for State-Appellee.

Following a bench trial, Defendant was convicted of Harassment, in violation of HRS § 711-1106(1)(a). Defendant first alleged the trial court’s finding of fact that the investigating officers testified “truthfully” was impermissibly inconsistent with it's findings that the officers did not do “a thorough investigation” and did not “follow up very properly.”

The ICA rejected this argument, noting that the trial court considered “the entire package of what happened that day” in holding the crime of harassment had occurred. The sole factual error concerned the length of time the alleged victim had been asked to stay away from his home. This error was deemed to not have affected Defendant’s “substantial rights and was harmless error. Hawai'i Rules of Penal Procedure, Rule 52(a).”

Defendant further argued that the evidence was insufficient to support her conviction. In viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the ICA rejected this argument, noting the existence of testimony of numerous officers supporting the charge, “as well as the photographs of injuries” to the alleged victim. Conviction affirmed.