1 NO 26020 STATE OF HAWAII PlaintiffAppellee vs ROBERT LEE TETU DefendantAppellant APPEAL FROM THE FIRST CIRCUIT COURT CR NO 0211456 ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTAPPELLANT ROBERT TETU ID: 853797
Download Pdf The PPT/PDF document "IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAW..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
1 1 NO. 26020 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE
1 NO. 26020 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I STATE OF HAWAI#I, Plaintiff-Appellee vs. ROBERT LEE TETU, Defendant-Appellant APPEAL FROM THE FIRST CIRCUIT COURT (CR. NO. 02-1-1456) ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT-APPELLANT ROBERT TETUS MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL (By: Duffy, J. for the court)1 Upon consideration of the motion to dismiss the appeal of Defendant-Appellant Robert Tetu filed by court-appointed counsel Jacob Merrill, the papers in support, and the records and files herein, it appears that: (1) on August 11, 2003, Defendant- Appellant Robert Tetu filed a notice of appeal in this case; (2) counsel now moves for dismissal because he believes Tetu no longer wishes to pursue the appeal; (3) counsel lists Cr. No. 02-1-1091 as the underlying criminal number for this appeal, but that it not the criminal case that is the subject of this appeal; (4) this appea
2 l stems from a conviction and sentence e
l stems from a conviction and sentence entered in Cr. No. 02-1-1456; (5) there is no declaration of Tetu in support of dismissal and counsels declaration that he made one phone call to locate Tetu after Tetu missed a meeting does 2 not demonstrate that he made a diligent effort to locate Tetu to determine whether Tetu wants to pursue this appeal. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion to dismiss the appeal is denied. This denial is without prejudice to a subsequent motion that contains the correct caption and criminal number, and includes an affidavit or declaration of Tetu that complies with HRAP Rule 42(c) or, if Tetu cannot be located, a declaration of counsel that indicates counsel made a diligent effort to locate Tetu. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, April 27, 2004. Jacob M. Merrill FOR THE COURT: for defendant-appellant on the motion Associate Justic