Background
Brandon Gonzaga was the defendant in a criminal proceeding in the Circuit Court of the Second Circuit, Hawaii (Case No. 2CPC-20-0000653). After an adverse outcome at the trial court level, Gonzaga appealed to the Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA), which issued a ruling under docket CAAP-24-0000364.
Unsatisfied with the ICA’s disposition, Gonzaga filed an application for writ of certiorari with the Hawaii Supreme Court on May 3, 2026, seeking further appellate review of his case.
The Court’s Holding
The Hawaii Supreme Court, in a brief order signed by Chief Justice Devens and Justices McKenna, Eddins, and Ginoza, along with Circuit Judge Holma sitting by assignment, unanimously rejected Gonzaga’s application for writ of certiorari on June 29, 2026.
By rejecting the application, the court declined to accept the case for plenary review. The ICA’s ruling therefore stands as the final appellate disposition of the matter.
Key Takeaways
- The Hawaii Supreme Court has discretionary authority to accept or reject certiorari applications; rejection signals the court found no sufficient grounds warranting further review.
- The ICA’s decision in CAAP-24-0000364 is now final and binding as to Gonzaga’s appeal.
- The order was unanimous across all five justices, including a circuit court judge assigned due to a court vacancy.
Why It Matters
This order is a procedural termination of Gonzaga’s appellate path within the Hawaii state court system. Because the Supreme Court declined review, the ICA ruling represents the last word on his claims, and no opinion on the merits was issued by the high court.
The case is a routine example of the Hawaii Supreme Court’s gatekeeping function over its docket. Practitioners should note that certiorari rejection in Hawaii, as in federal practice, carries no precedential weight on the underlying legal questions — it simply closes the appellate door for this defendant.