State v. Togia — Hawaiʻi appeals court affirms family-abuse conviction

Case
State of Hawai‘i v. Tony Togia
Court
Intermediate Court of Appeals of the State of Hawai‘i
Judge
Karen T. Nakasone (David Y. Ige, 2020); Keith K. Hiraoka (David Y. Ige, 2018)
Date Decided
July 30, 2026
Docket No.
CAAP-24-0000468
Topics
Family abuse; Sufficiency of evidence; Self-defense; Bench trial
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Tony Togia was convicted after a bench trial in the Family Court of the First Circuit of abuse of a family or household member, a petty misdemeanor. The charge arose from an argument with his girlfriend, Kimberly Marshall, with whom he shared a daughter and a home.

The family court found that Togia squirted baby oil into Marshall’s eyes and face while passing her as he left their bedroom. Marshall had not permitted the contact; the oil blurred her vision and caused pain and panic. Togia admitted squirting the oil, testifying that Marshall had blocked his path out of the house.

The Court’s Holding

The Intermediate Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction and sentence. It held that substantial evidence supported the family court’s finding that Togia intentionally or knowingly subjected Marshall to offensive physical contact.

The appellate court rejected Togia’s claims that the State failed to disprove self-defense, defense of others, and use of force to prevent a crime, as well as his challenge to the required mental state. Viewed in the light most favorable to the State, the evidence showed Marshall had not used or threatened physical force when Togia sprayed the oil. Togia’s arguments instead challenged the trial court’s credibility and weight determinations, which the appellate court would not revisit.

Key Takeaways

  • A sufficiency challenge to the denial of a judgment of acquittal is reviewed under the same standard as a challenge to the evidence supporting the conviction.
  • Appellate courts view the evidence in the strongest light for the prosecution and do not reweigh witness credibility.
  • Evidence that the complainant had not threatened force when the defendant used offensive contact supported rejection of the asserted defenses.

Why It Matters

The decision illustrates the deference Hawai‘i appellate courts give to a trial judge’s factual and credibility findings after a bench trial. A defendant’s alternative account of motive or claimed justification will not warrant reversal where credible evidence supports the factfinder’s contrary conclusions.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top