Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Hawaii v. DeCastro

Intermediate Court of Appeals of Hawaii
913 P.2d 558 (1996)


Facts

Robert DeCastro (defendant) was driving his employee, Wesley Damas, back to a warehouse when DeCastro saw Officer Derek Rodrigues driving recklessly in pursuit of another driver. Rodrigues pulled the driver over, and DeCastro pulled over behind Rodrigues’s police car to take down the license-plate number. Rodrigues approached the van and, according to DeCastro, began speaking aggressively to DeCastro and Damas. After taking DeCastro’s license and registration, Rodrigues told DeCastro to wait in the van while Rodrigues went back to his police car. DeCastro called 911 and reported that Rodrigues was harassing him, and asked if he could leave and return to the warehouse. The 911 operator told DeCastro that he could leave, and instructed him to call back when he returned to the warehouse. DeCastro drove away, and Rodrigues gave chase in his police car. Additional police cars joined the chase after Rodrigues called for backup, and DeCastro finally pulled over. DeCastro was subsequently arrested for resisting an order to stop a motor vehicle. At trial, DeCastro argued that he lacked the requisite intent to commit the crime because the 911 operator had given him permission to leave and he reasonably believed he had legal authorization to leave. The district court disagreed and convicted DeCastro, finding that a reasonable person in DeCastro’s position would not have believed he had legal authorization to leave the scene. DeCastro appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Burns, C.J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 221,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.