Ionatana Tamapua v. Edwin Shimoda and the Attorney General of the State of Hawaii, Respondents

Bad Law
796 F.2d 261·1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 27604
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 21, 198685-2661California1,398 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kozinski, J.

We review the district court’s denial of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed by a state prisoner. Because we find that the conviction in this unusual case is unsupported by the evidence, we reverse.

Facts

Ionatana Tamapua was indicted by a Hawaii grand jury on the charge of theft in the first degree. The indictment alleged that Tamapua “did obtain property, to wit, money and a chain, from the person of Dinasa Puaala, with intent to deprive the said Dinasa Puaala of the property, thereby committing the offense of Theft in the First Degree____” Tamapua unsuccessfully moved to dismiss the indictment on the ground that it failed to state an offense because it did not allege that he obtained the property without authorization. In lieu of trial, the parties then stipulated to the factual allegations contained in the indictment but only with regard to the chain. The other charge was dropped. Based on the stipulation, the court found Tamapua guilty and imposed a five year sentence to run concurrently with a sentence he was already serving.

Tamapua appealed to the Hawaii Supreme Court arguing that the indictment did not charge that he obtained the chain without authorization,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.