Background
Michael Arlo Pavich sought review of a decision in his criminal case by filing an application for a writ of certiorari on May 27, 2026. The application followed proceedings in the Intermediate Court of Appeals under docket number CAAP-23-0000334 and originated from Case No. 2PC011000015.
The dispute presented to the Hawaiʻi Supreme Court concerns the State’s failure to retain biological evidence under HRS § 844D-126 and the potential remedies available under HRS chapter 844D, Part XI. The order also identifies a question concerning whether waiver affects Pavich’s statutory rights.
The Court’s Holding
The Hawaiʻi Supreme Court exercised its discretion under HRS § 602-59(a) and accepted Pavich’s application for a writ of certiorari. It directed that the matter be scheduled for oral argument, with the appellate clerk to notify the parties of the schedule.
The court did not decide whether Pavich is entitled to relief or determine the proper remedy for the State’s alleged failure to retain biological evidence. Instead, it ordered supplemental briefing on whether Pavich may obtain a remedy under HRS § 844D-126 if waiver does not affect his rights, and on the remedies appropriate for noncompliance with that provision in light of the broader statutory scheme. Supplemental briefs are due August 20, 2026, and may not exceed 15 pages.
Key Takeaways
- The court accepted Pavich’s certiorari application and will hear oral argument.
- The order requests additional analysis of remedies for failure to preserve biological evidence under HRS § 844D-126.
- The court has not yet ruled on the merits or awarded Pavich any remedy.
Why It Matters
The forthcoming decision may clarify what relief is available when the State fails to comply with Hawaiʻi’s statutory requirements for retaining biological evidence. It may also explain how waiver interacts with the rights and remedies established by HRS chapter 844D, Part XI.