2013 Hawaii Revised Statutes
TITLE 37. HAWAII PENAL CODE
706. Disposition of Convicted Defendants
706-600 Sentence in accordance with this chapter.

Law Journals and Reviews

Comments and Questions About Mental Health Law in Hawaii. 13 HBJ No. 4 Winter 1978, pg. 18.

§706-600 Sentence in accordance with this chapter. No sentence shall be imposed otherwise than in accordance with this chapter. [L 1972, c 9, pt of §1; am L 1986, c 314, §10]

COMMENTARY ON §706-600

This section establishes that dispositions for all offenses-- whether defined within or outside of the Penal Code--are to be imposed in accordance with this chapter and that, except for the power of the court to impose "incidental civil sanctions such as forfeitures of property, suspension or cancellation of licenses, removal from office and the like," as provided in §706-605(4), "the only dispositions authorized are those permitted by the Code."[1]

The Penal Code, in centralizing provisions relating to the disposition of convicted defendants in one chapter, differs from previous law which provided a separate sanction (fine or imprisonment or both) for each offense. This resulted in authorized sentences which, when considered in relation to the potential danger to the person resulting from the commission of each offense, gave rise to a sense of inconsistency. An act of destruction of real or personal property with intent to hinder the United States in its military preparations was given a 20- year sentence and a $10,000 fine[2] while kidnapping was deemed worthy of a life sentence but only a $1,000[3] fine. An offense delicately called "carnal abuse" of a female child under twelve years of age was punishable by life imprisonment,[4] whereas manslaughter, defined as killing without malice aforethought, received a relatively lenient ten-year sentence.[5] Larceny from the person drew a two-year sentence and a $2,000 fine,[6] whereas simple larceny, not involving any potential danger to the person, was punished by a ten-year sentence but no fine at all.[7] None of the penalties mentioned is inherently wrong, although most are questionable, but taken together they reflect no consistent policy.

By centralizing sentencing the Code seeks to achieve an internal consistency which is lacking under previous law.

Case Notes

As §706-661 and this section do not authorize a court to impose a single sentence on a defendant who has been convicted of multiple charges, trial court did not violate plea agreement by imposing a life term for each class A felony defendant was convicted of, and then running each life term concurrently. 91 H. 20, 979 P.2d 1046 (1999).

__________

§706-600 Commentary:

1. M.P.C., Tentative Draft No. 2, comments at 12 (1954).

2. H.R.S. §767-2.

3. Id. §749-1.

4. Id. §768-36.

5. Id. §748-7.

6. Id. §750-22.

7. Id. §750-19.