Slavick v. State

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER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NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER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

7