Background
Donald B. Marks petitioned the Supreme Court of Hawaiʻi for a writ of certiorari after proceedings in the Intermediate Court of Appeals, CAAP-23-0000737. The matter also identifies Circuit Court case numbers 1CPN-21-0000002 and 1PC021002410.
Marks filed his application on July 16, 2026. His challenge includes the constitutionality of Hawaiʻi’s statutory sentencing scheme and the authority exercised by the Hawaiʻi Paroling Authority.
The Court’s Holding
The Supreme Court of Hawaiʻi accepted Marks’s application for a writ of certiorari under HRS § 602-59(a). The order does not resolve the merits of Marks’s constitutional challenge.
Invoking Hawaiʻi Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 40.1, the court limited oral argument to whether HRS §§ 706-656 and 706-669 violate separation-of-powers principles. The parties must address, in particular, whether the Hawaiʻi Paroling Authority’s authority generally and its authority to set a convicted defendant’s minimum prison term violate separation of powers or other provisions of the federal and Hawaiʻi Constitutions argued by Marks.
Key Takeaways
- The court granted certiorari but made no merits ruling.
- Oral argument is confined to the constitutional validity of the identified sentencing statutes and parole authority.
- The appellate clerk will notify the parties of oral-argument scheduling.
Why It Matters
The order places Hawaiʻi’s sentencing and parole framework before the state’s highest court for focused constitutional review. It signals that the forthcoming merits proceedings will center on the allocation of sentencing-related power between the judiciary, Legislature, and Hawaiʻi Paroling Authority.