Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

Code · Hawaii · Chapter 635

§635-30 Peremptory challenges, criminal cases.

338 words·~2 min read·/hi/chapter-635/635-30

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

§635-30 Peremptory challenges, criminal cases. In criminal cases, if the offense charged is punishable by life imprisonment, each side is entitled to twelve peremptory challenges. If there are two or more defendants jointly put on trial for such an offense, each of the defendants shall be allowed six challenges. In all other criminal trials by jury each side is entitled to three peremptory challenges. If there are two or more defendants jointly put on trial for such an offense, each of the defendants shall be allowed two challenges.
In all cases the State shall be allowed as many challenges as are allowed to all defendants. [L 1903, c 38, §21; am L 1915, c 73, §1; RL 1925, §2419; am L 1932 1st, c 11, §2; RL 1935, §3737; RL 1945, §10113; RL 1955, §231-13; am imp L 1957, c 282; HRS §635-30; am L 1972, c 89, §2B(k)]
Rules of Court
See HRPP rule 24(b).
Sequence for challenging jurors, see RCC rule 17(f).
Law Journals and Reviews
State v. Levinson: Limitations on a Criminal Defendant's Use of Peremptory Challenges. 13 UH L. Rev. 279 (1991).
Case Notes
Where four joint defendants joined in each of ten challenges, held that they had exercised their full right of challenge, although each would have been allowed ten challenges if taken separately. 3 H. 90 (1869).
Defendant allowed twelve peremptory challenges only when the charged offense itself carries penalty of life imprisonment. 65 H. 354, 652 P.2d 1119 (1982).
Circuit court plainly erred where, during jury selection, it removed two jurors for cause on the motion of respondent after the jury panel already had been passed for cause, and defendant and respondent had already exhausted their peremptory challenges; this procedure violated rule 24 of the HRPP, which provides that challenges for cause may be made at any time prior to the exercise of peremptory challenges, and in effect abrogated the parity in the number of peremptories each side is guaranteed pursuant to this section. 127 H. 415, 279 P.3d 683 (2012).
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.