State v. Nichols

How later courts described this case

• holding "that,... in the case of erroneous jury instructions, [the plain error] standard of review is effectively merged with the [Hawai'i Rules of Penal Procedure] Rule 52(a) harmless error standard of review because it is the duty of the trial court to properly instruct the jury[,]" and, thus, "once instructional error is demonstrated, we will vacate, without regard to whether timely objection was made, if there is a reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the defendant's conviction, i.e., that the erroneous jury instruction was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt"
• stating that “[w]hile [remedial] discretion may exist in the federal courts,” “there is no ease in this jurisdiction referring to ‘remedial discretion’ in connection with plain error, nor can we discover any reported criminal case in which this court has found plain error but refused to reverse in the exercise of discretion ” (emphasis added)
• holding that "once instructional error is demonstrated, we will vacate, without regard to whether timely objection was made, if there is a reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the defendant's conviction, i.e. , that the erroneous jury instruction was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt."
• holding that "this [c]ourt will apply the plain error standard of review to correct errors which seriously affect the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings, to serve the ends of justice, and to prevent the denial of fundamental rights" (citations omitted)

Written by the judges who cited it.