State v. Abregano
Annotate this CaseDefendant was charged with violation of a protective order. The date of the trial was continued for one month because the trial judge was ill. This continuance resulted in Defendant’s trial not beginning until fourteen days after the six-month period under Haw. R. Penal P. 48 for trying a criminal defendant expired. Defendant filed a motion to dismiss for a violation of his right to a speedy trial. The family court denied the motion, concluding that the continuance due to the judge’s illness extended the Rule 48 trial deadline by one month because the illness constituted “good cause” for delay under Rule 48(c)(8). After a trial, the jury found Defendant guilty. The Intermediate Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment of conviction. The Supreme Court vacated the judgments of the lower courts, holding that, under the circumstances of this case, the family court erred in determining that the trial judge’s illness constituted good cause to exclude one month under Rule 48. Remanded.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.