Hawai'i Legal News

  State v. Pickell (HSC December 26, 2023) Background. Michael Pickell was charged with operating a vehicle while under the influence of an intoxicant. He filed a motion to suppress evidence challenging the basis for the traffic stop.   At the hearing, Officer Raul Mehra testified that he was on duty in Kihei one night when he saw Pickell in the left-turn-only lane with his left-turn signal on at the intersection of Pi‘ilani Highway and Ohukai Road. In Pickell’s lane was a left-turn-only sign and a left directional arrow. Next to the traffic light there was a gin that indicated left-turn only. When Pickell’s light turned green, he made a U-turn instead of turning left onto Ohukai Road. The turn required Pickell to drive across double solid yellow lines and a dashed white line. Officer Mehra initiated a traffic stop. Pickell said he was going home but later said he was going to Safeway. He also said he thought he could make a lawful U-turn because he was from California ...

Traffic Infractions Do not Bar Subsequent Prosecutions State v. Kalua (ICA September 2, 2015) Background. Manaiakalani Kalua received two citations: one for excessive speeding in violation of HRS § 291C-105(a)(1) and one for regular-kine speeding in violation of HRS § 291C-102(a)(1). Excessive speeding means the vehicle is going either 80 mph or more or the vehicle is in excess of 30 mph of the speed limit. The two charges are based on two separate incidents. In the notice of traffic infraction, Officer T. Koyanagi measured Kalua’s speed by radar and stated that he was going 71 mph in a 55-mph zone and that Officer Koyanagi tried to stop him as the speed limit dropped to 40 mph. In that zone, Officer Koyanagi cited Kalua for going 73 mph, which formed the basis for the excessive speeding. For the regular-kine speeding, Kalua had to answer the citation within 21 calendar days or the court would enter a default judgment. He paid the speeding ticket and the default judgment....

State v. Cooley (ICA June 30, 2010) Background. The State charged Cooley with possession of an alcoholic beverage at Waialae Beach Park, a public area. Revised Ordinances of Honolulu § 40-1.2. The offense is a petty misdemeanor. ROH § 40-1.3. At his arraignment, the State moved to amend the charge to the consumption of an intoxicating liquor at a scenic look out, which is a violation. HRS § 291-3.3. The district court granted the motion and ordered Cooley to pay $27.00 in fees and fines. The violation appeared on Cooley's traffic record. Cooley filed a motion to correct the abstract of traffic record on the grounds that HRS § 291-3.3 was not a "moving violation." The district court denied the motion and concluded that Cooley "waived any defense that the consumption of the intoxicating liquor at the scenic lookout had to have arisen from the operation of a motor vehicle." Cooley filed a motion for reconsideration and requested a hearing. That too ...