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 704

§704-405 Determination of fitness to proceed.

468 words·~2 min read·/hi/chapter-704/704-405

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

§704-405 Determination of fitness to proceed. When the defendant's fitness to proceed is drawn in question, the issue shall be determined by the court. If neither the prosecuting attorney nor counsel for the defendant contests the finding of the report filed pursuant to section 704-404, the court may make the determination on the basis of such report. If the finding is contested, the court shall hold a hearing on the issue. When the report is received in evidence upon such hearing, the party who contests the finding thereof shall have the right to summon and to cross-examine the persons who joined in the report or assisted in the examination and to offer evidence upon the issue. [L 1972, c 9, pt of §1]
COMMENTARY ON §704-405
This section departs from the prior law[1] and provides that the issue of the defendant's fitness to proceed will be determined solely by the court. In this the Code follows the Model Penal Code.[2] The fitness of the defendant to proceed is only tangentially related to the defendant's condition at the time of the conduct alleged and the defendant's responsibility for that conduct. Moreover, there might be several periodic hearings on the question of the defendant's fitness to be proceeded against. It seems unwise to afford the defendant a jury determination in each instance.
The Code also allows the court to make a determination of fitness to proceed on the basis of an uncontested report; which is in accord with prior law in felony cases.[3] The last sentence of this section allows a limited exception to the hearsay rule so that the report of an examining expert may be received in evidence without the necessity of calling the expert to the stand. The exception is not inconsistent with the purpose of the hearsay rule because the defendant is assured of the right to summon and to cross-examine the reporting examiner if the defendant wishes.
Law Journals and Reviews
Fitness to Proceed: Compassion or Prejudice? II HBJ, no. 13, at 135 (1998).
Case Notes
Consideration of the sanity commission report is permissible use of hearsay. 63 H. 186, 623 P.2d 881 (1981).
Where defendant's counsel declined to call and cross-examine the doctors who prepared the sanity report, counsel waived defendant's right of confrontation. 63 H. 186, 623 P.2d 881 (1981).
Cited: 60 H. 17, 586 P.2d 1028 (1978).
__________
§704-405 Commentary:
1. H.R.S. §711-91.
2. M.P.C. §4.06.
3. See H.R.S. §711-91, which reads in part: "If the court deems such report conclusive of the then present insanity... of the accused, the court may allow a nolle prosequi to be entered in the case, and in such case shall forthwith, without other or further proceedings, adjudge the accused to be insane and commit him to the state hospital until discharged as provided by law...."
★   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.