In re: of K.R. and B.R.

• Court: Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals
• Decided: March 19, 2025
• Docket: CAAP-24-0000615
• Status: Published

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX 19-MAR-2025 10:29 AM Dkt. 49 SO

NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

IN THE INTEREST OF K.R. AND B.R.

APPEAL FROM THE FAMILY COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT (FC-S NO. 24-00024)

SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER (By: Leonard, Acting Chief Judge, Hiraoka and McCullen, JJ.)

Father-Appellant (Father) appeals from the September 9,

2024 Orders Concerning Child Protective Act (September 9, 2024

Order) entered by the Family Court of the First Circuit (Family

Court).1 Pursuant to the Child Protective Act (CPA), the Family

Court asserted jurisdiction over Father and Mother-Appellee

(Mother) (Parents), and K.R. and B.R. (Children), and awarded

Petitioner-Appellee Department of Human Services (DHS) foster

custody of the Children.

Father raises a single point of error on appeal,

contending that the record lacks sufficient evidence he sexually

1 The Honorable Lesley N. Maloian presided. NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

abused K.R. Father also challenges Findings of Fact (FOFs) 15,

85, 86, 100, 104-08, 128, 130, 132, 140, and 141, some of which

appear to be mixed questions of fact and law.

Upon careful review of the record and the briefs

submitted by the parties, and having given due consideration to

the arguments advanced and the issues raised, we resolve Father's

point of error as follows:

Unchallenged FOFs include the following. The genesis

of this CPA case was a report to DHS of sexual abuse and threat of sexual abuse to K.R. by Father, threat of sexual abuse to B.R.

by Father, and physical neglect and threat of neglect of both

Children by Mother.2 K.R. was forensically interviewed by a

Honolulu Police Department detective and she disclosed, inter

alia, that Father forced her to have sex with him. DHS social

worker Kelsey Mills (Mills) gave expert testimony in the areas of

social work and child protective or child welfare services. The

Family Court found Mills to be a credible witness and accepted

her testimony.

The gravamen of Father's appeal is that only the

recording of K.R.'s interview, Mills's testimony, and DHS's

February 14, 2024 Safe Family Home Report implicated Father, and

the evidence was insufficient to support the Family Court's

findings and conclusions that Father is the perpetrator of sexual

abuse to K.R. and not able to provide Children with a safe family

2 Father is K.R.'s step father and B.R.'s father. K.R. was a teenager, and B.R. was a young school-age child, at the time of the report.

2 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

home, even with the assistance of a service plan. Father also

challenges the Family Court's rejection of Mother's testimony as

not credible, as well as its rejection of the testimony of Dr.

John Mascaro, PhD, with regard to the allegations in the

Petition. Father points to certain testimony that he asserts

should be given greater weight than the evidence relied on by the

Family Court.

"It is well-settled that an appellate court will not

pass upon issues dependent upon the credibility of witnesses and the weight of the evidence; this is the province of the trier of

fact." In re Doe, 95 Hawai#i 183, 190, 20 P.3d 616, 623 (2001).

"The [trial] judge may accept or reject any witness's testimony

in whole or in part." State v. Kwong, 149 Hawai#i 106, 112, 482

P.3d 1067, 1073 (2021). There is substantial evidence supporting

the Family Court's findings and we are not left with a definite

and firm conviction that a mistake has been made. See Doe, 95

Hawai#i at 190, 20 P.3d at 623.

We will not disturb the Family Court's assessment of

the credibility of the witnesses in this case. While there were

some inconsistencies between parts of Mills' testimony and K.R.'s

recorded interview, viewing all of the evidence before the Family

Court, we cannot conclude that the Family Court clearly erred in

its findings or abused its discretion in its determination that

Father is the perpetrator of sexual abuse to K.R. and he is not

willing or able to provide Children with a safe family home, even

with the assistance of a service plan.

3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

For these reasons, the Family Court's September 9, 2024

Order is affirmed.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, March 19, 2025.

On the briefs: /s/ Katherine G. Leonard Acting Chief Judge Herbert Y. Hamada, for Father-Appellant. /s/ Keith K. Hiraoka Associate Judge Derek D. Peterson, Julio C. Herrera, /s/ Sonja M.P. McCullen Abigail S. Dunn Apana, Associate Judge Kurt J. Shimamoto, Deputy Attorneys General, Department of the Attorney General, for Petitioner-Appellee The Department of Human Services.

Brandon K. Eugenio, (Arakaki & Eugenio), for Guardian Ad Litem-Appellee.