§~\\\4':
NOT FOR PU>BLICA'I`ION `lN VVEST'S HAWA}"I REP()R'I"S AND I’ACIMFIC REPORTER
NO. 2959l
IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS
oF THE sims op HAWA:‘: f j\jjp;
STATE OF HAWATI, Plaintiff~Appellee, v.
MARK K. OBATA, Defendant-Appellant
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT
(CRIMlNAL NO. O7~l~l623)
SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER
(By: Nakamura, Chief Judge, Fujise and Leonard, JJ.)
Defendant-Appellant (Obata) appeals the Circuit Court
of the First Circuit's (Circuit Court) Judgment of Conviction and
Sentence entered on December 22, 2008, convicting him of (l)
Accidents Involving Death or Serious Bodily Injury in violation
of Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 29lC-12 (2007); (2) Promoting
a Dangerous Drug in the Third Degree in violation of HRS § 712-
l243 (Supp. 2009); (3) Unlawful Use of Drug Paraphernalia in
violation of HRS § 329-43.5(a) (1993); and (4) Driving Without
License in violation of HRS § 286-102 (2OO7).F
Obata raises the following point of error on appeal:
In view of its apparent bias against Obata, the trial
court erred in failing to sua sponte recuse itself from
sentencing [Obata], and further abused its discretion in
sentencing him to imprisonment, in disregard of strong
evidence warranting a probation sentence.
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
resolve Obata's two-part point of error as follows:
The record does not reveal that the Circuit Court
behaved, ruled, or acted unfairly or unduly unfavorably toward
Obata at either the December 1l, 2008 hearing regarding
3/ The Honorable Randal K.O. Lee presided.
N()T F()Il PU BL'ICAT{ON lN W'ES'["S I?IAVVAI"I REPO.RTS ANI) PACI_FIC REI’(')RTEI{
Defendant's Motion to Continue Sentencing or at Obata‘s December
22, 2008 sentencing. The Circuit Court articulated cogent
reasons at the December ll, 2008 hearing for denying Defendant‘s
Motion to Continue Sentencing. At the December 22, 2008
sentencing, the Circuit Court did not make comment or express any
opinion that evidenced personal bias or prejudice against Obata.
The record does not support Obata‘s assertion of judicial
misconduct. Accordingly, we conclude that the Circuit Court did
not plainly error in failing to sua sponte recuse itself from
this case. §
We further conclude that the Circuit Court did not
abuse its discretion in sentencing Obata. The record evidences
that the Circuit Court properly considered the factors identified
in HRS § 706-606 (l993)W when it determined Obata's sentence.
In sentencing Obata to imprisonment rather then probation, the
Circuit Court emphasized the egregious nature and circumstances
of the offense, including the severity of the injuries to the
young cyclist struck by Obata‘s vehicle, while driving without a
HRS § 706~606, provides:
Factors to be considered in imposing a sentence. The
court, in determining the particular sentence to be imposed,
shall considers
(l) The nature and circumstances of the offense and
the history and characteristics of the
defendant;
(2) The need for the sentence imposed:
(a) To reflect the seriousness of the offense,
to promote respect for law, and to provide
just punishment for the offense;
(b) To afford adequate deterrence to criminal
conduct;
(c) To protect the public from further crimes
of the defendant; and
(d) To provide the defendant with needed
educational or vocational training,
medical care, or other correctional
treatment in the most effective manner;
(3) The kinds of sentences available; and
(4) The need to avoid unwarranted sentence
disparities among defendants with similar
records who have been found guilty of similar
conduct.
NOT 'FOR fP`U`BLICA"I`ION [N VV'}.+`,S'I"S HAWAI‘I R.EPORTS ANI) PACIFIC RISPOI{'I"ER
license, and Obata‘s fleeing the scene of the accident. The
Circuit Court also highlighted Obata's prior criminal record,
substance abuse history, and other characteristics. Obata
acknowledges all of these factors, but argues that the Circuit
Court abused its discretion in failing to give greater weight to
the recent successful completion of a substance abuse program,
expressions of regrets, and desire to get a job and provide
restitution. On the record in this, we conclude that the
sentence imposed by the Circuit Court did not clearly exceed the
bounds of reason or disregard rules or principles of law or
practice to the substantial detriment of a party litigant. §§§,
e.g,, State v. Reis, 115 HawaFi 79, 83, 165 P.3d 980, 984
(2007); State V. RauCh, 94 HaWaiT.3l5, 322, l3 P.3d 324, 331
(2000); State v. Gaylord, 78 Hawafi 127, 144, 890 P.2d 1167,
ll84 (l995).
Accordingly, the Circuit Court's December 22, 2008
Judgment of Conviction and Sentence is affirmed.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawafi, February 17, 2010.
On the briefs: %( //
Phyl1is J. Hironaka Chief Judge
Deputy Public Defender
for Defendant~Appe1lant
Loren J. Thomas
Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
for Plaintiff-Appel1ee