State v. Holbron
904 P.2d 912 · Hawaii Supreme Court · 1995
Facts
Billy Holbron's girlfriend, Roxanne Benarao, brought him food at his residence. After Holbron expressed dislike for the food, he became agitated, throwing the plate and a radio at her. He then retrieved a gasoline container, asked Benarao if she was "ready to fucking die?", and threw gasoline on her. Holbron threw two lighted matches at Benarao, the second of which ignited the gasoline, causing her severe burns. Holbron fled, and the house burned down. Holbron's defense claimed head trauma and organic brain difficulties led to reckless, not intentional, actions.
Procedural history
A criminal complaint was filed against Billy Holbron in the First Circuit Court for attempted second degree murder. After a trial, the jury found him guilty, and the circuit court sentenced him to life imprisonment. Holbron appealed to the Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA), which affirmed the conviction, finding the erroneous jury instruction harmless. This court granted certiorari to review the ICA's decision.
Issue
The court considered whether Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) §§ 705-500 and 707-702(l)(a) create the offense of attempted manslaughter. Specifically, it addressed if a defendant could be charged with or convicted of "attempted manslaughter" based on attempting recklessly to cause another person's death.
Holding
The court held that HRS §§ 705-500 and 707-702(l)(a) do not give rise to the offense of "attempted manslaughter" under any circumstances, overruling State v. Tagaro. The circuit court's instruction on attempted reckless manslaughter was erroneous because it described a nonexistent offense. However, the court affirmed the ICA's decision, finding the erroneous instruction to be harmless error.
Rule
Criminal attempt liability under HRS § 705-500 requires an intentional state of mind regarding the consequence of the crime. Recklessness, which involves consciously disregarding a substantial and unjustifiable risk, is incompatible with the specific intent required for an attempt. Therefore, there can be no offense of "attempted manslaughter" premised on recklessly causing death (involuntary manslaughter), as one cannot intend an unintentional result. However, attempted voluntary manslaughter, involving an intentional killing under extreme emotional disturbance, is recognized. Erroneous jury instructions are presumptively harmful but can be deemed harmless if there is no reasonable possibility they contributed to the conviction.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener
Case brief last reviewed . Prepared by CaseReader from the published opinion.