Cruelty to animals in the first degree

COMMENTARY ON §711-1108.5 Act 114, Session Laws 2007, created the offense of cruelty to animals in the first degree, making it a felony to intentionally or knowingly torture, mutilate, or poison or cause the torture, mutilation, or poisoning of any pet animal resulting in serious bodily injury or death of the pet animal. The legislature found that violence, whether against humans or animals, must not be tolerated in our society. Evidence suggests a link between animal abuse and the commission of violent acts against humans. Hawaii is only one of nine states in the United States without a felony offense for domestic animal abuse. The legislature also found that pet animals provide a close emotional bond and relationship with their owners and family members and friends. Violence and harm committed against the animals have a significant emotional impact on their owners and family. The felony provisions of Act 114 protected pet animals. Conference Committee Report No. 29. Act 111, Session Laws 2008, amended this section by making an offense involving serious bodily injury or death to an equine animal a class C felony, thus extending to equine animals some of the legal protections accorded to pet animals relating to animal cruelty. The legislature believed that horses belong under the protection of law and that adding equine animals to the list of animals protected under the animal cruelty law reflects the fact that companion animals come in all shapes and sizes. House Standing Committee Report No. 1589-08, Senate Standing Committee Report No. 2879, Conference Committee Report No. 20-08. Act 135, Session Laws 2011, amended this section to include killing or attempting to kill any pet animal belonging to another person without first obtaining legal authority or the consent of the pet animal's owner, except for the humane euthanasia of an animal in accordance with American Veterinary Medical Association accepted standards or conduct that the actor believes necessary to avoid an imminent harm or evil to the actor, another person, or an animal. The legislature found that the existing language of this section did not expressly address any method of killing a pet animal other than torture, mutilation, or poisoning. The legislature believed that the loophole should be closed for several reasons. The killing of a pet animal for sport was not only abhorrent, but this type of aggressive behavior has wider implications. Animal abuse has connections to the abuse of family members and may increase aggressive or violent tendencies in children who witness their pets being abused or killed. There were concerns that animal abuse or killing perpetuates the cycle of violence because people who commit acts of serious animal abuse frequently have histories of, or future tendencies toward, violent crimes against humans. By expressly making the killing of a pet animal a criminal offense, the legislature intended to deter this conduct and its grave effects. Senate Standing Committee Report No. 559, Conference Committee Report No. 29. Act 209, Session Laws 2013, amended this section to prohibit persons convicted of cruelty to animals in the first degree from possessing or owning any pet animal or equine animal for a minimum of five years from the date of conviction. The legislature found that Act 209 was based on the concept that defendants convicted of cruelty to animals in the first degree should no longer be afforded the privilege of owning a pet animal or equine animal. Conference Committee Report No. 62. Act 221, Session Laws 2024, amended this section to: (1) clarify that the offense of cruelty to animals in the first degree does not apply to accepted veterinary practices when the practices are performed by a licensed veterinarian; and (2) repeal the exemption of cropping and docking as customarily practiced under the offense of cruelty to animals in the first degree. The legislature found that there was a need for more explicit laws to protect pet animals from significant harm caused by veterinary procedures performed by unlicensed individuals. The legislature also found that existing law exempted non-veterinarians from performing painful surgical procedures on animals, and non-veterinarians often performed these procedures without access to pain medication, antibiotics to prevent infection, and other critical pre- and post-operative care that can only be provided under the supervision of a licensed veterinarian. Accordingly, the legislature noted that Act 221 would reduce unnecessary pain, harm, and suffering to pet animals by closing the loophole allowing owners to operate on or hire unqualified people to operate on their own pet animals. Senate Standing Committee Report No. 3749, Senate Standing Committee Report No. 3291.