Preview:

* * * NOT FOR PUBLICATION * * *
NO. 24405 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I FRANCIS A. DEFEO, Petitioner-Appellant, vs. STATE OF HAWAI#I, Respondent-Appellee. APPEAL FROM THE SECOND CIRCUIT COURT (S.P.P. NO. 00-1-0009(3)) SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER (By: Moon, C.J., Levinson, Nakayama, Acoba, and Duffy, JJ.) Petitioner-appellant Francis A. Defeo appeals from the June 21, 2001 order of the Circuit Court of the Second Circuit, the Honorable Joseph E. Cardoza presiding, denying Defeo's Hawai#i Rules of Penal Procedure (HRPP) Rule 40 petition for post conviction relief without a hearing. On appeal, Defeo argues

that the circuit court erred in dismissing his HRPP Rule 40 petition because: (1) his trial counsel was ineffective; (2) his

appellate counsel was ineffective; and (3) he was denied a hearing on his ethics complaint against his trial counsel. Upon carefully reviewing the record and the briefs submitted by the parties and having given due consideration to the issues raised and the arguments presented, we resolve each of Defeo's contentions on appeal as follows: First, Defeo has failed to establish a colorable claim that his trial counsel was ineffective for advancing a theory of self-defense because: (1) his testimony at trial supported the

-1-

* * * NOT FOR PUBLICATION * * *
defense established by Hawai#i Revised Statutes (HRS)

Download Defeo v. State.pdf

Hawaii Law