Hawaii Revised Statutes
626. Hawaii Rules of Evidence
603 Oath or affirmation.

Rule 603 Oath or affirmation. Before testifying, every witness shall be required to declare that the witness will testify truthfully, by oath or affirmation administered in a form calculated to awaken the witness' conscience and impress the witness' mind with the witness' duty to do so. L 1980, c 164, pt of §1; gen ch 1985
RULE 603 COMMENTARY
This rule is identical with Fed. R. Evid. 603. Its intent is to retain the common-law requirement that a witness must solemnly undertake to tell the truth. As the Advisory Committee's Note to Fed. R. Evid. 603 puts it: "[N]o special verbal formula is required."
Although under early common law, refusal of a witness to affirm his belief in a supreme being or to invoke the deity according to a specified formulary oath rendered him incompetent, modern law is contrary. In United States v. Looper, 419 F.2d 1405, 1407 (4th Cir. 1969), the court said: "The common law ... requires neither an appeal to God nor the raising of a hand as a prerequisite to a valid oath. All that the common law requires is a form or statement which impresses upon the mind and conscience of a witness the necessity for telling the truth."
The liberal requirement for an "oath or affirmation" is broadly consistent with Hawaii law. Hawaii Rev. Stat. §1-21 (1976) provides that "[t]he word 'oath' includes a solemn affirmation." A prior statute, superseded by this rule, stated: "Every court ... may administer the following oath-affirmation to all witnesses legally called before them: Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?" Hawaii Rev. Stat. §621-12 (1976) (repealed 1980) (originally enacted as L 1876, c 32, §48; am L 1973, c 155, §1). In State v. Ponteras, 44 H. 71, 75, 351 P.2d 1097, 1100 (1960), the court, in determining the issue of the sufficiency of an oath administered to a minor, stated: "No particular words are required in exacting the declaration or promise from a child to tell the truth."
The rule is also in accord with Hawaii's statutes on perjury. Hawaii Rev. Stat. § §710-1060 through 710-1062 (1976) all proscribe false statements under oath, and Hawaii Rev. Stat. §710-1000(10) (1976) defines "oath" for the purposes of these statutes: "'Oath' includes an affirmation and every other mode authorized by law of attesting to the truth of that which is stated...." In addition, Hawaii Rev. Stat. §710-1068 (1976) provides that it is no defense that "the oath was administered or taken in an irregular manner."

Structure Hawaii Revised Statutes

Hawaii Revised Statutes

Title 33. Evidence

626. Hawaii Rules of Evidence

626-1 Enactment.

100 Title and citation.

101 Scope.

102 Purpose and construction.

701-105 (1976), which limits the effect of the penal code commentary because, as the commentary to that section points out, "of the strong judicial deference given legislative committee reports and other evidence of legislative intent authored by the...

103 Rulings on evidence.

104 Preliminary questions.

105 Limited admissibility.

106 Remainder of or related writings or recorded statements.

201 Judicial notice of adjudicative facts.

202 Judicial notice of law.

301 Definitions.

302 Presumptions in civil proceedings.

303 Presumptions imposing burden of producing evidence.

304 Presumptions imposing burden of proof.

305 Prima facie evidence.

306 Presumptions in criminal proceedings.

401 Definition of "relevant evidence".

402 Relevant evidence generally admissible; irrelevant evidence inadmissible.

403 Exclusion of relevant evidence on grounds of prejudice, confusion, or waste of time.

404 Character evidence not admissible to prove conduct; exceptions; other crimes.

405 Methods of proving character.

406 Habit; routine practice.

407 Subsequent remedial measures.

408 Compromise, offers to compromise, and mediation proceedings.

409 Payment of medical and similar expenses.

409.5 COMMENTARY This rule, shielding expressions of "sympathy, commiseration, or condolence", resembles measures recently adopted in several sister states. See, e.g., CA Evid. Code §1160, excluding expressions of "sympathy or a general sense of bene...

410 Inadmissibility of pleas, plea discussions, and related statements.

411 Liability insurance.

412 Sexual offense and sexual harassment cases; relevance of victim's past behavior.

501 Privileges recognized only as provided.

502 Required reports privileged by statute.

503 Lawyer-client privilege.

504 Physician-patient privilege.

504.1 Psychologist-client privilege.

505 Spousal privilege.

84A-22.13 and 22.15 (1991), the New Jersey Legislature declared that the "counseling of victims is most successful when the victims are assured [that] their thoughts and feelings will remain confidential and will not be disclosed without their permis...

506 Communications to clergy.

507 Political vote.

508 Trade secrets.

509 Privilege against self-incrimination.

510 Identity of informer.

511 Waiver of privilege by voluntary disclosure.

512 Privileged matter disclosed under compulsion or without opportunity to claim privilege.

513 Comment upon or inference from claim of privilege; instructions.

601 General rule of competency.

602 Lack of personal knowledge.

603 Oath or affirmation.

621-16 (1976) (repealed 1980) (originally enacted as L 1876, c 32, §50; am L 1972, c 104, §1(k)), provided that the court could "receive the evidence of any minor; provided, that the evidence of the minor is given upon his affirmation to tell the tru...

604 Interpreters.

605 Competency of judge as witness.

606 Competency of juror as witness.

607 Who may impeach.

608 Evidence of character and conduct of witness.

609 Impeachment by evidence of conviction of crime.

17-18, 575 P.2d 448, 459-60 (1978): The general rule is that a witness may be impeached through a showing of bias, hostility or prejudice, and this may be done by use of the witness' own testimony or by other evidence.... We believe that the correct...

610 Religious beliefs or opinions.

611 Mode and order of interrogation and presentation.

612 Writing used to refresh memory.

613 Prior statements of witnesses.

614 Calling and interrogation of witness by court.

615 Exclusion of witnesses.

616 Televised testimony of child.

701 Opinion testimony by lay witnesses.

702 Testimony by experts.

704-416 overrides this rule. 71 H. 591, 801 P.2d 27 (1990).

703 Bases of opinion testimony by experts.

704 Opinion on ultimate issue.

705 Disclosure of facts or data underlying expert opinion.

706 Court-appointed experts.

801 Definitions.

802 Hearsay rule.

349-52 (1959), is to define the "most trustworthy class of statements" of witnesses to be turned over to the defense for impeachment purposes. Regarding the requirement that (e)(2) subdivision statements be "substantially verbatim," the court said: "...

803 Hearsay exceptions; availability of declarant immaterial.

804 Hearsay exceptions; declarant unavailable.

805 Hearsay within hearsay.

806 Attacking and supporting credibility of declarant.

901 Requirement of authentication or identification.

902 Self-authentication.

903 Subscribing witness' testimony unnecessary.

1001 Definitions.

1002 Requirement of original.

1003 Admissibility of duplicates.

1004 Admissibility of other evidence of contents.

1005 Public records.

1006 Summaries.

1007 Testimony or written admission of party.

1008 Functions of court and jury.

1101 Applicability of rules.

1102 Jury instructions; comment on evidence prohibited.

626-2 Effective date; applicability to future cases and pending cases.

626-3 Inconsistent laws.