State v. Pua

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Electronically Filed
Intermediate Court of Appeals
CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
20-APR-2026
08:19 AM
Dkt. 27 ODSLJ
NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I

STATE OF HAWAI I, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
DROSSTAIN PUA, Defendant-Appellant.

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT
(CASE NO. 3CPC-XX-XXXXXXX)

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL
(By: Nakasone, Chief Judge, Hiraoka and Wadsworth, JJ.)

Upon review of the record, it appears that:
(a) On September 18, 2025, Defendant-Appellant
Drosstain Pua (Pua) filed a Notice of Appeal from the March 15,
2024 Judgment of Conviction and Sentence (Judgment).
(b) Pua's notice of appeal was not filed within 30
days after the entry of judgment, as required by Hawai i Rules of
Appellate Procedure (HRAP) Rule 4(b)(1), and he does not appear
to have obtained an extension of time to file a notice of appeal
under HRAP Rule 4(b)(5).
(c) Rene H. Heimgartner (Heimgartner) was Pua's
counsel at the time of the Judgment and the deadline to file the
notice of appeal under HRAP Rule 4(b)(1). Randall K. Hironaka
(Hironaka) was appointed counsel for Pua on July 2, 2024, and
Hironaka continues as Pua's appellate counsel.
(d) The March 27, 2026 Order to Show Cause as to why
the appeal should not be dismissed for lack of appellate
jurisdiction stated that "ineffective assistance of counsel is
not plain from the record" and Pua's January 13, 2026 Motion to
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Accept Late Transcript Requests, Statement of Jurisdiction, and
Motion for Extension of Time to File Opening Brief "does not
state whether Pua instructed Heimgartner and/or Hironaka to
appeal from the Judgment before the notice of appeal was due;
knew when a notice of appeal was due but did not decide to appeal
until after the deadline expired; or was not informed when a
notice of appeal was due."
(e) In response to the March 27, 2026 Order to Show
Cause, Heimgartner's April 9, 2026 declaration states in part
that to the best of his recollection Heimgartner "informed
Defendant [Pua] of his appeal rights and deadlines to file a
notice of appeal" and Pua "requested an appeal to be filed after
May 12, 2024, and outside of the HRAP Rule 4(b)(5) time period to
request an extension." Hironaka's April 13, 2026 Response to
Order to Show Cause states in part that "Pua did not express a
desire to appeal until well after the 30-day deadline to do so"
and "wanted to appeal the judgment" in 3CPC-XX-XXXXXXX "even
though the time for appeal had long since lapsed."
(f) On this record, the court lacks appellate
jurisdiction to review the merits of Pua's appeal because
ineffective assistance of counsel in failing to comply with the
procedural requirements to timely file the notice of appeal is
not plain from the record. See State v. Uchima, 147 Hawai i 64,
82, 464 P.3d 852, 870 (2020) (concluding the court may review the
merits of an untimely appeal "when it is plain from the record
that defense counsel failed to comply with the procedural
requirements for filing" the appeal).
Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the appeal is
dismissed without prejudice to Pua seeking relief by petition
under Hawai i Rules of Penal Procedure Rule 40.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no further action will be
taken on the March 27, 2026 Order to Show Cause.

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

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all pending motions are
dismissed.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai i, April 20, 2026.

/s/ Karen T. Nakasone
Chief Judge

/s/ Keith K. Hiraoka
Associate Judge

/s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth
Associate Judge

3