See appended chapter note, pts. I A, I C, I D.

See appended chapter note, pts. I A10, I C, I D10. Correction of sentence, see HRPP rule 35.

See appended chapter note, pts. I A9, I C, I D9.

Exceptions unnecessary, HRPP rule 51.

Questions on appeal must have been raised below. 43 H. 299, 301; 44 H. 370, 355 P.2d 25; 45 H. 83, 88, 363 P.2d 964, 967; 46 H. 475, 485, 382 P.2d 920, 934; 49 H. 1, 406 P.2d 887; 49 H. 42, 45, 410 P.2d 976; 50 H. 253, 438 P.2d 401. But see as to fundamental error. 49 H. 504, 421 P.2d 305; 49 H. 522, 528, 423 P.2d 438; 50 H. 287, 439 P.2d 666. For earlier cases see notes to RLH 1955, §§208-3, 210-1, 212-1, 212-4, 212-8, 212-14. Though generally judgment will be reversed only on theory presented to trial court, there may be deviations when justice requires. 53 H. 45, 487 P.2d 1070. Court has power to notice plain errors not raised at trial if they affect substantial rights. Specific grounds for objection are required. 56 H. 343, 537 P.2d 724. Objection to admission of evidence is necessary; objection on specific ground is a waiver of all other objections. 57 H. 96, 550 P.2d 900.

See HRPP rule 52. Harmless error in indictment, see HRPP rule 7(d). No reversal unless error prejudicial, 43 H. 119; 44 H. 10, 352 P.2d 320; 45 H. 295, 316 P.2d 499; 45 H. 457, 370 P.2d 468; 46 H. 127, 376 P.2d 125; 47 H. 185, 199, 389 P.2d 146; 49 H. 77, 102, 412 P.2d 669; 49 H. 116, 412 P.2d 662. Erroneous instruction presumptively harmful. 49 H. 327, 330, 417 P.2d 638. Error that is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt does not mandate reversal of conviction. 57 H. 26, 548 P.2d 1402.

For earlier cases see notes to RLH 1955, §§210-1, 212-14.

See notes to §635-56. Cited: 47 H. 472, 478, 391 P.2d 403, note 1.

Test on criminal appeals is whether verdict is supported by substantial evidence. 55 H. 1, 514 P.2d 373.

See appended chapter note, pt. I A7e, I D7.

Correction of sentence, see HRPP rule 35.

Where defendant in a pretrial suppression hearing noted the defendant's objection to introduction of the defendant's inculpatory statement, the defendant's failure to object at trial to reception of the statement did not constitute waiver of the issue on appeal. 61 H. 499, 605 P.2d 935.

Circuit court's unlawful use of "struck jury" method to select jury was not plain error. 9 H. App. 578, 855 P.2d 34.

Because trial court did not apply appropriate sentencing standards to extended term motion and remand would allow circuit court to reconsider other sentencing alternatives in fashioning an appropriate sentence, modification of sentence was not warranted on appeal. 77 H. 340 (App.), 884 P.2d 403.

Modification of sentence on appeal warranted where district court, on resentencing, failed to take into account time defendant already served in prison, amount of fines paid, and community service completed. 82 H. 83 (App.), 919 P.2d 995.