The Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals has affirmed the conviction of Cody Presti for unlawful imprisonment in a case that raises questions about self-representation and the admissibility of evidence. This ruling, issued on August 31, 2026, affects how similar cases may be handled in the future, particularly those involving defendants who choose to represent themselves.
Presti was initially indicted on charges of attempted sexual assault and kidnapping but was convicted of the lesser charge of unlawful imprisonment. The court's decision is significant for those involved in criminal cases, especially self-represented defendants, as it addresses several legal challenges raised by Presti during his appeal.
Background
The case began when Presti met a 36-year-old woman, referred to as the complaining witness (CW), on a dating app called Bumble. While CW was visiting Oʻahu on a tourist visa, she agreed to go on a date with Presti. However, after their dinner, instead of taking her home, Presti drove her to a secluded area, allegedly to stargaze.
During this encounter on July 28, 2023, CW testified that when she attempted to escape, Presti chased her, picked her up, and tried to remove her clothing. After escaping and seeking help from a passing driver, CW reported the incident to the police. Presti was arrested based on her identification of him in a photographic lineup and was subsequently indicted by a grand jury.
The Ruling
The court ruled on multiple points raised by Presti, including challenges to the photographic lineup used for his identification, the admission of certain evidence, and the constitutionality of the statutes under which he was charged. Ultimately, the court upheld the lower court's decisions, affirming Presti's conviction.
The court stated, "The photographic lineup was not impermissibly suggestive...Presti's driver's license photograph did not 'unduly stand out' from the filler photographs."
Presiding Judge Hiraoka, along with Judges McCullen and Guidry, found that Presti's arguments were largely unsupported and that he failed to demonstrate any errors that would warrant overturning the conviction. The court emphasized that the photographic lineup was conducted fairly and that the evidence presented during the trial was admissible.
Impact
This ruling has implications for future cases, particularly those involving self-representation. The court's decision underscores the importance of proper legal representation and the challenges that self-represented defendants may face in navigating the legal system. It also highlights the court's expectation that defendants provide clear and substantiated arguments when appealing a conviction.
By affirming the conviction, the court sets a precedent that may deter future defendants from attempting to represent themselves without adequate legal knowledge or support. This case may encourage discussions about the need for legal assistance for defendants who choose to represent themselves, particularly in serious criminal matters.
What's Next
Presti has the option to seek further appeal, potentially to the Hawaii Supreme Court, but details about any related cases or future actions were not available in the court filing. As the legal landscape evolves, this case will likely be referenced in discussions about self-representation and the standards for evidence admissibility in criminal trials.