State v. Chryst

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAII REPORTS OR THE PACIFIC REPORTER

Electronically Filed
Intermediate Court of Appeals
CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
16-OCT-2025
08:02 AM
Dkt. 36 ODSD

NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

STATE OF HAWAI#I, Plaintiff-Appellee, v.
KITTY ANN CHRYST, Defendant-Appellant

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT
HONOLULU DIVISION
(CASE NOS. 1DTI-19-050120 & 1DTI-XX-XXXXXXX)

ORDER
(By: Wadsworth, Presiding Judge, and McCullen and Guidry, JJ.)

Upon review of the record, it appears that:
(1) On June 20, 2024, self-represented Defendant-
Appellant Kitty Ann Chryst (Chryst) filed the notice of appeal.
(2) On November 25, 2024, the appellate clerk entered
a default of the statement of jurisdiction and opening brief,
which states, among other things, that Chryst may request relief
from default by motion.
(3) On December 6, 2024 Chryst filed a motion that the
court later construed as a motion for relief from default of the
statement of jurisdiction and opening brief and for other relief.
(4) On June 30, 2025, the court issued an order which,
among other things, set aside the default and extended Chryst's
deadline to file the statement of jurisdiction and opening brief
to July 30, 2025, "if Chryst still intends to pursue this
appeal." The court also informed Chryst that any further default
of the opening brief may result in sanctions authorized by Rule
30 of the Hawai#i Rules of Appellate Procedure (HRAP), including
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAII REPORTS OR THE PACIFIC REPORTER

without limitation, monetary sanctions, the appeal being
dismissed, or both.
(5) On September 29, 2025, the court issued an order
(Order) which, among other things, instructed Chryst to file a
"statement of jurisdiction that shows the specific statutory or
other grounds upon which this court's appellate jurisdiction is
invoked, and otherwise complies with HRAP Rule 12.1" and "a
declaration, affidavit, or other sworn statement, not to exceed
five (5) pages, addressing why this appeal should not be
dismissed as moot" within ten (10) days of entry of the Order.
(6) The Order also cautioned Chryst that "failure to
comply with [the Order] may result in sanctions, including
without limitation the appeal being dismissed."
(7) Chryst has not taken any further action in this
appeal, and did not request any extension of time to comply with
the Order.
Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the appeal is
dismissed.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, October 16, 2025.

/s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth
Presiding Judge

/s/ Sonja M.P. McCullen
Associate Judge

/s/ Kimberly T. Guidry
Associate Judge

2