Rapozo v. State
Annotate this Case
The Supreme Court vacated the judgment of the intermediate appellate court (ICA) and the circuit court's order denying Appellant's eighth Haw. R. Pen. P. Rule 40 petition for post-conviction relief, holding that Appellant raised colorable claims in his petition.
Appellant was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. In his eighth Rule 40 petition, Appellant argued that the trial court erred by ordering restitution without first determining whether Appellant could afford it and that it was error that he be denied parole for nonpayment of restitution. The circuit court denied the petition without holding a hearing. The ICA affirmed. The Supreme Court vacated the orders below, holding (1) Appellant stated a colorable claim that the Hawai'i Paroling Authority denied parole due to nonpayment of restitution; and (2) State v. Johnson, 711 P.2d 1295 (Haw. 1985), did not create a "new rule," and the ICA erred in concluding that the Johnson rule did not retroactively apply to Defendant's sentence.
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.