State v. Satoafaiga

150 Hawai‘i 406

504 P.3d 324

STATE of Hawai‘i, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.Victoria I. SATOAFAIGA, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant.

SCWC-20-0000067

Supreme Court of Hawai‘i.

FEBRUARY 7, 2022

Hayden Aluli, Wailuku, for petitioner

Richard B. Rost, Wailuku, for respondent

RECKTENWALD, C.J., NAKAYAMA, McKENNA, WILSON, AND EDDINS, JJ.

OPINION OF THE COURT BY RECKTENWALD, C.J.

I. INTRODUCTION

Victoria I. Satoafaiga, a former employee of the Central Maui Boys & Girls Club (the Club), was indicted for the sexual assault of a twelve-year-old member of the organization (complaining witness or CW). Initially charged with four counts, including Sexual Assault in the First Degree for the "sexual penetration" of the CW, she accepted a plea agreement allowing her to plead no contest to an amended charge of Sexual Assault in the Fourth Degree and one count of Custodial Interference in the Second Degree. Satoafaiga moved for a deferred acceptance of no contest (DANC) plea. The circuit court denied the DANC motion and sentenced her to a one-year prison sentence. She appealed the denial of her DANC motion, and the Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA) affirmed. Satoafaiga now asks us to reverse the ICA and the circuit court's decisions and remand to the circuit court with instructions to enter an order granting the DANC motion nunc pro tunc to the date of her sentencing.

Satoafaiga's appeal requires us to decide whether it was proper for the circuit court to take into account an alleged act of "sexual penetration" when the only sexual-assault charge she pleaded to by definition excluded acts of sexual penetration. We hold that the circuit court's consideration of sexual penetration under these circumstances constituted an abuse of discretion. Satoafaiga pleaded no contest to Sexual Assault in the Fourth Degree, which criminalizes "sexual contact." Hawai‘i Revised Statutes (HRS) § 707-733(1)(a) (Supp. 2016). "Sexual contact" is defined as "any touching, other than acts of ‘sexual penetration’, of the sexual or other intimate parts of another." HRS § 707-700 (Supp. 2016) (emphasis added). Thus, Satoafaiga's no contest plea to Sexual Assault in the Fourth Degree excluded any allegation of sexual penetration. Under these circumstances, the circuit court abused its discretion when it improperly considered an allegation of sexual penetration in denying her DANC motion. We therefore vacate the ICA's judgment on appeal to the extent it affirmed the denial of the DANC motion and vacate the circuit court's judgment of conviction inasmuch as it denied the motion for a DANC.¹ We remand for reconsideration of Satoafaiga's DANC motion consistent with this opinion.

As to Satoafaiga's remaining arguments, we affirm the judgments of the ICA and the circuit court. The circuit court did not otherwise exceed the bounds of reason or abuse its discretion in ruling on her motion.

II. BACKGROUND

A. Factual Background²

Satoafaiga was employed as a director of the Boys and Girls Club of Central Maui between August 2016 and April 2017. The CW was a twelve-year-old living with her Aunt and Uncle, who had raised her since she was three years old. She was a member of the Club, part of a network of clubhouses that provides recreational opportunities and a safe haven for children of different ages.

Aunt and Uncle were first alerted to an inappropriate relationship between Satoafaiga and the CW when they discovered explicit text messages on the CW's phone. Near midnight on April 16, 2017, Uncle noticed that the CW was not asleep and appeared to be hiding under her covers. He asked her to hand over her phone. Uncle saw a text message exchange with an unknown person saved as "V.$(Mom)," who sent the CW explicit sexual messages and stated in one message, "I love you baby." The person had also sent the CW explicit images. Uncle asked who the person was and the CW told him it was Satoafaiga.³ Uncle was familiar with Satoafaiga as he had met her at the Club.

Three days later, the CW was interviewed at the Children's Justice Center in Wailuku. The CW related that she had gotten to know Satoafaiga after Satoafaiga expressed concern about the CW and told her to reach out if she needed. Their relationship progressed from there.⁴

The CW described two incidents of sexual assault. First, some months before the CW was interviewed, Satoafaiga asked the CW to help her retrieve some snacks upstairs at the Club; while there, she grabbed the CW by the hips and then kissed her on the lips, over her protest. Some time later, over spring break in 2017, the CW claimed that, while the two of them were alone together in an upstairs area at the Club, Satoafaiga digitally penetrated her under her clothing. The CW pushed her off and left the Club.⁵ Police later learned from Uncle that Satoafaiga gave the CW a sweater and two pairs of loop earrings as gifts. Satoafaiga resigned from the Club on April 27, 2017.

Pursuant to several search warrants, the Maui Police Department (MPD) obtained phone records from the CW and Satoafaiga's phones.⁶ The warrants revealed that Satoafaiga exchanged approximately 15,978 text messages with the CW over a roughly four-month period culminating in April 2017. Some of these text messages were sexually explicit.

Months later, on October 27, 2017, Aunt and Uncle contacted the MPD to report that the CW had run away. Uncle had gone to the Club to pick up the CW but was not able to locate her. The CW later told Aunt and Uncle that she had been with Satoafaiga and not at the Club during the daytime on October 27. Satoafaiga took her to the Kahului Break Water where she made several hickeys on the CW's chest. When the CW returned to the Club, she noticed Uncle waiting for her and ran away so she would not get in trouble. Finally, at about 4 a.m. the following morning, Satoafaiga's partner called Aunt to tell her the CW was at their residence. Aunt contacted the MPD, and the MPD escorted her to the residence.

Satoafaiga's account of that evening differed from Aunt and Uncle's. Satoafaiga and her partner claimed they had gone out for a "Ladies Night" around 9 p.m. on October 27. When they came home at about 2 a.m., they discovered the CW there; after questioning her about how she knew their address, they got Aunt's number from the CW and called her.

B. Procedural History

1. Circuit court proceedings⁷

A grand jury indicted Satoafaiga on four counts. Count One alleged that Satoafaiga committed Sexual Assault in the Third Degree by kissing the CW on the lips, in violation of HRS § 707-732(1)(b) (2014).⁸ Count Two alleged that she committed Sexual Assault in the First Degree by inserting her finger into the CW's vagina, in violation of HRS § 707-730(1)(b) (2014).⁹ Count Three alleged that she committed Attempted Sexual Assault in the Third Degree on October 27, 2017, presumably a reference to the Kahului Break Water incident, in violation of HRS §§ 705-500 (2014) and 707-732(1)(b).¹⁰ And Count Four alleged that she committed Custodial Interference in the Second Degree on the same date, in violation of HRS § 707-727(1)(a) (2014).¹¹ The circuit court later dismissed Count Three for failing to provide Satoafaiga with adequate notice.

The prosecutor offered Satoafaiga a plea agreement. The prosecution offered to dismiss Count One with prejudice and to amend Count Two to a charge of Sexual Assault in the Fourth Degree under HRS 707-733(1)(a) (Supp. 2016).¹² Count Four remained unchanged. Satoafaiga accepted the plea deal, agreeing to enter a plea of either guilty or no contest to Count Four and the amended Count Two and stipulating to a factual basis to support those charges. In conjunction with her plea agreement, Satoafaiga moved to defer the acceptance of her no contest plea.

The circuit court allowed her to withdraw her plea of not guilty and enter a plea of no contest. The court ordered a presentence investigation (PSI) report to be prepared.

The court convened on January 22, 2020 to consider the DANC motion and sentencing. Satoafaiga urged the court to find that the three prongs of the HRS § 853-1 (2014) analysis, governing DANC and deferred acceptance of guilty (DAG) plea motions, were met: (1) she voluntarily pleaded guilty or no contest before trial, (2) she was not likely to engage again in a criminal course of conduct, and (3) the ends of justice and the welfare of society did not require that she presently suffer the penalty imposed by law.¹³ First, she pointed to "the excellent presentence report and the character references" from friends, family, and coworkers that it included. She argued that her relative youth – she was in her late twenties at the time – and the fact that she had no arrest record weighed toward deferral. Satoafaiga referenced the "Assessment Factors for Sentencing" in the PSI report, which found that she had previously led a "law-abiding life" and that her "character and attitude and history" indicated that she was "unlikely to commit another crime." She next pointed to the legislative policy behind HRS § 853-1, which aimed to provide "first-time, accidental, or situational offenders" with an opportunity to maintain a clean record. In light of these factors, defense counsel asked the court to let her "prove to you that she's entitled to have her record free."

The State argued that deferral would not be appropriate for the sexual assault of a minor by a person in a position of authority. It characterized Satoafaiga's crime as not an "accidental" or "situational" one but rather a crime committed over a long period that bore "grooming aspects."¹⁴

The court found that the first prong of the HRS § 853-1 analysis was met because Satoafaiga voluntarily pleaded no contest before trial. Turning to the latter two prongs, the court first noted that Satoafaiga, at twenty-seven, had been more than twice the age of the CW and "should have known twice as much. Twice as mature, allegedly." The court acknowledged the "glowing" letters from friends, family, and colleagues in...