Haw. Rev. Stat. § 706-661
The court may sentence a person who satisfies the criteria for any of the categories set forth in section 706-662 to an extended term of imprisonment, which shall have a maximum length as follows:
When ordering an extended term sentence, the court shall impose the maximum length of imprisonment. The minimum length of imprisonment for an extended term sentence under paragraphs (2), (3), and (4) shall be determined by the Hawaii paroling authority in accordance with section 706-669.
HRS § 706-661
Applicability of Act 1, Second Special Session of 2007
L Sp 2007 2d, c 1, §5 provides:
"SECTION 5. This Act shall apply to all sentencing or resentencing proceedings pending on or commenced after the effective date of this Act [October 31, 2007], whether the offense was committed prior to, on, or after the effective date of this Act [October 31, 2007]. A defendant whose extended term of imprisonment is set aside or invalidated shall be resentenced pursuant to this Act upon request of the prosecutor. This Act shall not entitle a defendant who has previously been sentenced to an extended term to be resentenced pursuant to the procedures set forth in this Act unless the defendant is otherwise legally entitled to be resentenced."
Extended sentence imposed on multiple offender held not cruel and unusual punishment. 56 H. 343, 537 P.2d 724. Breach of plea agreement by prosecutor resulting from participation in extended term hearing may be remedied by remand for resentencing by another judge. 60 H. 93, 588 P.2d 412; 60 H. 104, 588 P.2d 408. Participation by prosecutor in hearing for extended term sentencing, even though pursuant to order of court, constituted breach of plea agreement.60 Haw. 93,588 P.2d 412. No abuse of discretion in court sentencing defendant to extended terms of imprisonment under this section and § 706-662 where, inter alia, court considered each of the factors enumerated in § 706-606 and all the mitigating factors raised by defendant.83 Haw. 335,926 P.2d 1258. As § 706-600 and this section do not authorize a court to impose a single sentence on a defendant who has been convicted of multiple charges, trial court did not violate plea agreement by imposing a life term for each class A felony defendant was convicted of, and then running each life term concurrently.91 Haw. 20,979 P.2d 1046. The constitutional prohibition against ex post facto measures was not offended by the plain language of Act 1, L Sp 2007 2d, amending §§ 706-662, 706-664, and this section regarding sentencing or resentencing for extended terms of imprisonment, where it was clear that the new jury provisions did not (1) increase criminal liability for conduct previously innocent, (2) aggravate the degree of defendant's crimes, (3) increase the punishment available at the time defendant committed defendant's crimes, or (4) alter evidentiary standards to defendant's detriment. 117 H. 381, 184 P.3d 133. The constitutional prohibition against ex post facto measures was not offended by the retrospective application to defendant of Act 1, L Sp 2007 2d, amending §§ 706-662, 706-664, and this section, where Act 1 did not punish as a crime an act previously committed which was innocent when done, make more burdensome the punishment for the crime after its commission, nor deprive one charged with the crime of any defense available according to the law when the act was committed. 118 H. 68 (App.), 185 P.3d 816.