Prosecutors seeking to
revoke bail for robber

A Circuit Court judge disregarded the law and her own findings in granting convicted robber Shaun Rodrigues' request to remain free pending appeal, prosecutors say.

Prosecutors filed a motion this week asking the Hawaii Supreme Court to revoke bail for Rodrigues and order him to begin serving his 20-year sentence for a July 2000 Manoa home-invasion robbery.

Rodrigues' attorney, William Harrison, said prosecutors raised the same arguments in an earlier attempt to have Circuit Judge Virginia Crandall set aside her order. The high court rejected their request two weeks ago, saying any request for relief should be filed in the pending appeal.

"They lost the last motion, and I expect they'll lose this one," Harrison said.

Crandall found Rodrigues, 24, of Kailua, guilty in March 2002 of breaking into a Manoa home and tying up and robbing Dianne and Dawn Sugihara at gunpoint.

Crandall issued written findings in December in which she found "compelling and credible" the Sugiharas' testimony and identification of Rodrigues.

In her findings, Crandall also concluded that police followed proper procedures in conducting the photo lineup and that the procedure used was "not impermissibly suggestive."

Even if they were suggestive, the Sugiharas' identification of Rodrigues "was sufficiently reliable for admission into evidence based on the totality of the circumstances," Crandall said.

She also found witnesses for the defense who testified as to Rodrigues' alibi that he was at home sleeping at the time of the robbery "incredible," considering their bias and demeanor while testifying, and the compelling and credible testimony of the Sugiharas.

Rodrigues has maintained from the beginning that he was mistakenly identified and wrongly convicted, citing a lack of evidence. He has filed notice he will appeal.

On Sept. 10, Crandall rejected the defense's request to reopen the trial based on new evidence. She found that statements by an inmate currently serving time for a home-invasion robbery in Kailua and who allegedly identified another man in the Sugihara robbery was "inadmissible" and vague.

In allowing Rodrigues to remain free pending appeal, Crandall found that he was not a flight risk or a danger to the community. But prosecutors argue that Crandall contradicted her earlier findings in also concluding that "the appeal, with respect to identification, would raise a substantial question of fact" and that if he prevailed in his appeal, "that may very well likely result in an order for a new trial or reversal."

Prosecutors argue that the contradiction arises because the judge says questions could be raised about identification made by two witnesses the judge has found to be credible.

Harrison does not agree that Crandall abused her discretion or ruled inconsistently.