(1) In a prosecution for criminal attempt, it is an affirmative defense that the defendant, under circumstances manifesting a voluntary and complete renunciation of the defendant’s criminal intent, gave timely warning to law-enforcement authorities or otherwise made a reasonable effort to prevent the conduct or result which is the object of the attempt.
criminal case

Have a question?
Click here to chat with a criminal defense lawyer and protect your rights.

Terms Used In Hawaii Revised Statutes 705-530

  • Defendant: In a civil suit, the person complained against; in a criminal case, the person accused of the crime.
(2) In a prosecution for criminal solicitation, it is an affirmative defense that the defendant, under circumstances manifesting a complete and voluntary renunciation of the defendant’s criminal intent:

(a) First notified the person solicited of the defendant’s renunciation[;]
(b) Gave timely warning to law-enforcement authorities or otherwise made a reasonable effort to prevent the conduct or result solicited.
(3) In a prosecution for criminal conspiracy, it is an affirmative defense that the defendant, under circumstances manifesting a voluntary and complete renunciation of the defendant’s criminal intent, gave timely warning to law-enforcement authorities or otherwise made a reasonable effort to prevent the conduct or result which is the object of the conspiracy.
(4) A renunciation is not “voluntary and complete” within the meaning of this section if it is motivated in whole or in part by:

(a) A belief that circumstances exist which increase the probability of detection or apprehension of the accused or another participant in the criminal enterprise, or which render more difficult the accomplishment of the criminal purpose; or
(b) A decision to postpone the criminal conduct until another time or to transfer the criminal effort to another victim or another but similar objective.
(5) A warning to law-enforcement authorities is not “timely” within the meaning of this section unless the authorities, reasonably acting upon the warning, would have the opportunity to prevent the conduct or result. An effort is not “reasonable” within the meaning of this section unless the defendant, under reasonably foreseeable circumstances, would have prevented the conduct or result.

  Previous
Next  
 Part IV Contents