NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX 28-JUN-2024 09:10 AM Dkt. 218 SO
NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
CHRIS SLAVICK, Petitioner-Appellant, v. STATE OF HAWAI#I, Respondent-Appellee
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT (S.P.P. NO. 1PR191000014; CR. NO. 1PC041001534)
SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER (By: Leonard, Acting Chief Judge; and Circuit Judges Hamman and Somerville, in place of Hiraoka, Wadsworth, Nakasone, McCullen, and Guidry, JJ., all recused)
Self-represented Petitioner-Appellant Chris Slavick
(Slavick) appeals from the January 23, 2020 Order Denying
Petition to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Judgment or to Release
Petitioner from Custody, Filed October 19, 2019 (Order Denying
2019 Petition), entered by the Circuit Court of the First Circuit
(Circuit Court).1
Slavick's October 19, 2019 Petition to Vacate, Set
Aside, or Correct Judgment or to Release Petitioner from Custody
(2019 Petition) arose in the first instance from Slavick's 2013
1 The Honorable Matthew J. Viola presided. NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
conviction for Promoting a Harmful Drug in the First Degree in
violation of Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 712-1244(1)(a)
(1993), for which he was sentenced to twenty years in prison.2
Slavick appealed from the 2013 conviction, and this court
affirmed. State v. Slavick, CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX, 2014 WL 3708070
(Haw. App. July 24, 2014) (SDO).
In the proceedings leading to this appeal, the Circuit
Court took judicial notice of the records and files in Criminal
Number 1PC041001534 and related appeal, CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX, and prior post-conviction proceedings (SPP No. 16-1-0004) and a
related appeal, CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX. Also having considered all the
records and files in this case (1PR191000014), the Circuit Court
denied the 2019 Petition.
In this appeal, Slavick contends that the Circuit Court
erred by denying the 2019 Petition without a hearing. Slavick
raises the same five grounds raised in his 2019 Petition as his
points of error on appeal. Slavick contends that the Circuit
Court abused its discretion and plainly erred in denying his 2019
Petition because: (1) the prosecution provided him in discovery
a fraudulent transcript of an October 28, 2003 interview; (2) in
2003, HRS § 329-18 did not list methandienone
(methandrostenolone) as a controlled substance; (3) the grand
jury indictment was obtained based on perjured testimony,
hearsay, and other prosecutorial misconduct; (4) the sentencing
judge falsified court records and relied on the falsified records
2 The Honorable Karen S.S. Ahn presided over the criminal trial and sentencing.
2 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
in determining his sentence; and (5) the Hawai#i Paroling
Authority (HPA) failed to follow its guidelines and violated his
right to due process.3
We take judicial notice of the records and files
of Slavick's appeal from his conviction, CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX, his
prior Hawai#i Rules of Penal Procedure (HRPP) Rule 40 petition,
SPP No. 16-1-0004 (2016 Petition), and related appeal, CAAP-17-
0000834.
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 by the parties, we
resolve Slavick's appeal as follows:
(1) Slavick argues that the prosecution provided him
with a fraudulent interview transcript during discovery. This
argument was previously raised and rejected as grounds for
relief. Slavick v. State, CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX, 2020 WL 6112523, *3
(Haw. App. Oct. 22, 2020) (SDO).
(2) Slavick argues that in 2003, HRS § 329-18 did not
list methandienone (methandrostenolone) as a controlled
substance. This argument is without merit. HRS § 329-18(g)(12) (Supp. 2013) identified Methandrostenolone (Methandienone) as an
anabolic steroid. Therefore, the Circuit Court did not err in
3 Slavick also argues that the Circuit Court was wrong in concluding that grounds one, and three through five of his 2019 Petition, were patently frivolous because he discovered the grounds for the first time within a box of documents he received from his prior appellate counsel pursuant to a January 4, 2018 order directing counsel to return documents to him. We conclude, however, that it is unnecessary to reach this argument.
3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
finding that ground two of the 2019 Petition was patently
frivolous and without support.
(3) Slavick argues that the grand jury indictment was
based on perjured testimony, hearsay, and other prosecutorial
misconduct. Slavick unsuccessfully raised this argument in
petitions for writ of habeas corpus submitted in the Circuit
Court before and after the jury returned its verdict of
conviction.4 Slavick did not raise this argument on direct
appeal or in his 2016 Petition and appeal, and he does not present any extraordinary circumstances justifying his failure to
raise the issue. We conclude that it is waived. See HRPP Rule
40(a)(3); see also, e.g., Stanley v. State, 76 Hawai#i 446, 451,
879 P.2d 551, 556 (1994).
In any case, it appears that this argument lacks merit.
A defendant bears the burden to prove that the improper
presentation of evidence to the grand jury was so extreme and
flagrant that the grand jury was clearly overreached or deceived
in a significant way. State v. Chong, 86 Hawai#i 290, 298, 949
P.2d 130, 138 (App. 1997). Slavick contended in the 2019
Petition that a witness erroneously told the grand jury that the
two bottles of pills found in his possession were labeled
"Danabol DS steroids" when they were not. However, two other
witnesses told the grand jury that the bottles were labeled
"Danabol DS, methandionone, 10 milligrams, 500 tablets," and one
witness testified that Slavick denied knowing the pills in his
4 Slavick was in custody at the time of the trial, resulting in his conviction.
4 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
possession were illegal to bring into the country. On this
record, we conclude that Slavick did not meet his burden of
proof, and the Circuit Court did not err in finding that ground
three of the 2019 Petition was patently frivolous and without
support.
(4) Slavick argues that the Circuit Court tampered
with a government record, in violation of HRS § 710-1017 (2014),
falsified records in the Judiciary's Ho#ohiki database and the
Hawai#i Integrated Justice Information Sharing database, and imposed an illegal sentence on him, by relying on a presentence
report with errors. Slavick fails to demonstrate that the
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX 28-JUN-2024 09:10 AM Dkt. 218 SO
NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
CHRIS SLAVICK, Petitioner-Appellant, v. STATE OF HAWAI#I, Respondent-Appellee
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT (S.P.P. NO. 1PR191000014; CR. NO. 1PC041001534)
SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER (By: Leonard, Acting Chief Judge; and Circuit Judges Hamman and Somerville, in place of Hiraoka, Wadsworth, Nakasone, McCullen, and Guidry, JJ., all recused)
Self-represented Petitioner-Appellant Chris Slavick
(Slavick) appeals from the January 23, 2020 Order Denying
Petition to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Judgment or to Release
Petitioner from Custody, Filed October 19, 2019 (Order Denying
2019 Petition), entered by the Circuit Court of the First Circuit
(Circuit Court).1
Slavick's October 19, 2019 Petition to Vacate, Set
Aside, or Correct Judgment or to Release Petitioner from Custody
(2019 Petition) arose in the first instance from Slavick's 2013
1 The Honorable Matthew J. Viola presided. NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
conviction for Promoting a Harmful Drug in the First Degree in
violation of Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 712-1244(1)(a)
(1993), for which he was sentenced to twenty years in prison.2
Slavick appealed from the 2013 conviction, and this court
affirmed. State v. Slavick, CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX, 2014 WL 3708070
(Haw. App. July 24, 2014) (SDO).
In the proceedings leading to this appeal, the Circuit
Court took judicial notice of the records and files in Criminal
Number 1PC041001534 and related appeal, CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX, and prior post-conviction proceedings (SPP No. 16-1-0004) and a
related appeal, CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX. Also having considered all the
records and files in this case (1PR191000014), the Circuit Court
denied the 2019 Petition.
In this appeal, Slavick contends that the Circuit Court
erred by denying the 2019 Petition without a hearing. Slavick
raises the same five grounds raised in his 2019 Petition as his
points of error on appeal. Slavick contends that the Circuit
Court abused its discretion and plainly erred in denying his 2019
Petition because: (1) the prosecution provided him in discovery
a fraudulent transcript of an October 28, 2003 interview; (2) in
2003, HRS § 329-18 did not list methandienone
(methandrostenolone) as a controlled substance; (3) the grand
jury indictment was obtained based on perjured testimony,
hearsay, and other prosecutorial misconduct; (4) the sentencing
judge falsified court records and relied on the falsified records
2 The Honorable Karen S.S. Ahn presided over the criminal trial and sentencing.
2 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
in determining his sentence; and (5) the Hawai#i Paroling
Authority (HPA) failed to follow its guidelines and violated his
right to due process.3
We take judicial notice of the records and files
of Slavick's appeal from his conviction, CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX, his
prior Hawai#i Rules of Penal Procedure (HRPP) Rule 40 petition,
SPP No. 16-1-0004 (2016 Petition), and related appeal, CAAP-17-
0000834.
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 by the parties, we
resolve Slavick's appeal as follows:
(1) Slavick argues that the prosecution provided him
with a fraudulent interview transcript during discovery. This
argument was previously raised and rejected as grounds for
relief. Slavick v. State, CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX, 2020 WL 6112523, *3
(Haw. App. Oct. 22, 2020) (SDO).
(2) Slavick argues that in 2003, HRS § 329-18 did not
list methandienone (methandrostenolone) as a controlled
substance. This argument is without merit. HRS § 329-18(g)(12) (Supp. 2013) identified Methandrostenolone (Methandienone) as an
anabolic steroid. Therefore, the Circuit Court did not err in
3 Slavick also argues that the Circuit Court was wrong in concluding that grounds one, and three through five of his 2019 Petition, were patently frivolous because he discovered the grounds for the first time within a box of documents he received from his prior appellate counsel pursuant to a January 4, 2018 order directing counsel to return documents to him. We conclude, however, that it is unnecessary to reach this argument.
3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
finding that ground two of the 2019 Petition was patently
frivolous and without support.
(3) Slavick argues that the grand jury indictment was
based on perjured testimony, hearsay, and other prosecutorial
misconduct. Slavick unsuccessfully raised this argument in
petitions for writ of habeas corpus submitted in the Circuit
Court before and after the jury returned its verdict of
conviction.4 Slavick did not raise this argument on direct
appeal or in his 2016 Petition and appeal, and he does not present any extraordinary circumstances justifying his failure to
raise the issue. We conclude that it is waived. See HRPP Rule
40(a)(3); see also, e.g., Stanley v. State, 76 Hawai#i 446, 451,
879 P.2d 551, 556 (1994).
In any case, it appears that this argument lacks merit.
A defendant bears the burden to prove that the improper
presentation of evidence to the grand jury was so extreme and
flagrant that the grand jury was clearly overreached or deceived
in a significant way. State v. Chong, 86 Hawai#i 290, 298, 949
P.2d 130, 138 (App. 1997). Slavick contended in the 2019
Petition that a witness erroneously told the grand jury that the
two bottles of pills found in his possession were labeled
"Danabol DS steroids" when they were not. However, two other
witnesses told the grand jury that the bottles were labeled
"Danabol DS, methandionone, 10 milligrams, 500 tablets," and one
witness testified that Slavick denied knowing the pills in his
4 Slavick was in custody at the time of the trial, resulting in his conviction.
4 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
possession were illegal to bring into the country. On this
record, we conclude that Slavick did not meet his burden of
proof, and the Circuit Court did not err in finding that ground
three of the 2019 Petition was patently frivolous and without
support.
(4) Slavick argues that the Circuit Court tampered
with a government record, in violation of HRS § 710-1017 (2014),
falsified records in the Judiciary's Ho#ohiki database and the
Hawai#i Integrated Justice Information Sharing database, and imposed an illegal sentence on him, by relying on a presentence
report with errors. Slavick fails to demonstrate that the
presentence report, which reported that he had no prior
convictions, was erroneous.
Slavick points to, but offers no discernible argument
as to the significance of, the court's correction to the record
in his criminal case by deleting records that were filed in that
case by clerical error. In other words, there is no discernible
argument as to how this affected his sentencing. Slavick was
convicted of a class A felony. HRS § 712-1244(2) (1993). At
sentencing, the Circuit Court was required to impose an
indeterminate twenty-year term of imprisonment. HRS § 706-659
(2014).
We conclude that this argument is without merit.
(5) Slavick argues that the HPA violated its
guidelines and the law, and as a result of an "illegal scheme"
involving biased HPA members and dishonest Saguaro Correctional
Center (SCC) staff, are inflicting "many more months of
5 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
imprisonment [on him] beyond [his] expired minimum" term. He
complains of "fraudulent write-ups" in progress reports submitted
by SCC staff to the HPA and lack of assistance from his parole
officer to prepare a proposed parole plan.
The HPA retains discretion whether to grant or deny
parole. State v. Keohokapu, 127 Hawai#i 91, 112, 276 P.3d 660,
681 (2012). It appears that the HPA denied Slavick parole
because Slavick needed to take a cognitive skills class, not
because of the misconducts noted in the SCC progress reports. Although Slavick complained that his parole officer
refuses to provide him a list of halfway houses to contact, so
that he can list a residence address in his parole plan, the
State represents that Slavick "refuses to fill out the forms or
sign for the paperwork HPA sends to him." Slavick does not
contend that he is unable to obtain information regarding halfway
houses through means other than his parole officer. Accordingly,
we cannot conclude that the Circuit Court erred when it concluded
that Slavick failed to establish a due process violation here.
For these reasons, the Circuit Court's January 23, 2020
Order Denying 2019 Petition is affirmed.
6 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
It is further ordered that all pending motions
(including the submissions at DKT 175, 192, 194, 196, 216) are
denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, June 28, 2024.
On the briefs: /s/ Katherine G. Leonard Acting Chief Judge Chris Slavick, Petitioner-Appellant Pro Se. /s/ Kirstin M. Hamman Circuit Judge Sonja P. McCullen, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, /s/ Rowena A. Somerville City and County of Honolulu, Circuit Judge for Respondent-Appellee. Craig Y. Iha, Lisa M. Itomura, Deputy Attorneys General for Respondent-Appellee.