State v. Cabos

Summary

The Hawai‘i Intermediate Court of Appeals reviewed the State’s appeal from an order dismissing Keola Cabos’s indictment for allegedly failing to define “continuing course of conduct,” along with Cabos’s cross-appeal concerning a separate motion to dismiss based on alleged hearsay before the grand jury. The court held that the indictment, read together with discovery identifying the alleged transactions, sufficiently informed Cabos of the charges and vacated the dismissal order. The court dismissed the cross-appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction and remanded for further proceedings.

Holdings

1. An indictment charging promoting a dangerous drug in the first degree through an aggregation theory is not insufficient merely because it does not include a common-law or other definition of "continuing course of conduct," "continuing conduct," or "continuous offense," where the indictment alleges the statutory elements and, together with information provided during the case, fairly informs the defendant of the nature and cause of the charges.
2. The Intermediate Court of Appeals lacked jurisdiction over Cabos's cross-appeal because the challenged order was not a judgment of conviction, certified interlocutory order, or appealable collateral order.

Questions Presented

1. Whether an indictment charging drug-distribution offenses under an aggregation theory is constitutionally insufficient because it does not define the term "continuing course of conduct."
2. Whether Cabos could cross-appeal from the denial of his second motion to dismiss the indictment when there was no judgment of conviction, certified interlocutory order, or applicable collateral-order basis.

Disposition

vacated