DUI defendant (Hawaii) · Go Syfert
← Hawaii issues

DUI defendant in Hawaii

13 Hawaii opinions name it 2 courts 1985–2009 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Hawaii courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (12)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Nishigreen
hawapp · 1993 · cited in 2 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 1995–2009
2 sentences

2009"A police officer may not testify, without proper foundation, about his opinion about whether a DUI defendant is intoxicated . . . based on FSTs." State v. Toyomura, 80 Hawai`i 8, 26, 904 P.2d 893, 911 (1995) (brackets omitted) (citing State v. Nishi, 9 Haw.

1995Specifically, Toyomura relies on State v. Nishi, 9 Haw.App. 516 , 852 P.2d 476 (1993), in making the following argument: [A] police officer may not testify, without proper foundation, about his opinion about whether a DUI defendant is intoxicated ... based on [FSTs]....

22
Keel v. Stategreen
alaska · 1980 · cited in 2 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 1989–2006
2 sentences

2006We stated that an Intoxilyzer test result is “not ‘unassailable[,]’ ” id. at [25], 740 P.2d at 1020 (quoting Keel v. State, 609 P.2d 555, 557 (Alaska 1980)), and that a DUI defendant has a “constitutional right to present all relevant evidence in his defense[.]” Id. at [26], 740 P.2d at 1021 (quoting State v. Vega, 12 Ohio St.3d 185, 190 , 465 N.E.2d 1303,1308 (1984) (dissenting opinion)). *326 Defendant therefore had the right through cross-examination of [police department criminalist] Hong to question the reliability of the Intoxilyzer, which utilizes a partition ratio of 2,100 to 1, and th

2006We stated that an Intoxilyzer test result is “not ‘unassailable[,]’ ” id. at [25], 740 P.2d at 1020 (quoting Keel v. State, 609 P.2d 555, 557 (Alaska 1980)), and that a DUI defendant has a “constitutional right to present all relevant evidence in his defense[.]” Id. at [26], 740 P.2d at 1021 (quoting State v. Vega, 12 Ohio St.3d 185, 190 , 465 N.E.2d 1303,1308 (1984) (dissenting opinion)). *326 Defendant therefore had the right through cross-examination of [police department criminalist] Hong to question the reliability of the Intoxilyzer, which utilizes a partition ratio of 2,100 to 1, and th

22
State v. Vegagreen
ohio · 1984 · cited in 2 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 1989–2006
2 sentences

2006We stated that an Intoxilyzer test result is “not ‘unassailable[,]’ ” id. at [25], 740 P.2d at 1020 (quoting Keel v. State, 609 P.2d 555, 557 (Alaska 1980)), and that a DUI defendant has a “constitutional right to present all relevant evidence in his defense[.]” Id. at [26], 740 P.2d at 1021 (quoting State v. Vega, 12 Ohio St.3d 185, 190 , 465 N.E.2d 1303,1308 (1984) (dissenting opinion)). *326 Defendant therefore had the right through cross-examination of [police department criminalist] Hong to question the reliability of the Intoxilyzer, which utilizes a partition ratio of 2,100 to 1, and th

2006We stated that an Intoxilyzer test result is “not ‘unassailable[,]’ ” id. at [25], 740 P.2d at 1020 (quoting Keel v. State, 609 P.2d 555, 557 (Alaska 1980)), and that a DUI defendant has a “constitutional right to present all relevant evidence in his defense[.]” Id. at [26], 740 P.2d at 1021 (quoting State v. Vega, 12 Ohio St.3d 185, 190 , 465 N.E.2d 1303,1308 (1984) (dissenting opinion)). *326 Defendant therefore had the right through cross-examination of [police department criminalist] Hong to question the reliability of the Intoxilyzer, which utilizes a partition ratio of 2,100 to 1, and th

22
State v. Toyomuragreen
haw · 1995 · cited in 2 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 2001–2009
2 sentences

2009"A police officer may not testify, without proper foundation, about his opinion about whether a DUI defendant is intoxicated . . . based on FSTs." State v. Toyomura, 80 Hawai`i 8, 26, 904 P.2d 893, 911 (1995) (brackets omitted) (citing State v. Nishi, 9 Haw.

2001In State v. Toyomura, 80 Hawai'i 8 , 904 P.2d 893 (1995), the following colloquy occurred while the arresting police officer was on the stand during the trial of a DUI defendant: THE COURT: Okay.

12
State v. Christiegreen
haw · 1988 · cited in 1 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 2006–2006
2 sentences

2006We next note that our supreme court stated that “the use of the Intoxilyzer had been approved by the Director of Health and it met the Federal Standard for Devices to Measure Breath Alcohol.” State v. Tengan, 67 Haw. 451, 462 , 691 P.2d 365, 373 (1984). 14 Recently, citing Tengan , the supreme court reiterated that the Intoxi-lyzer 401 IAS was “approved for use by the county police departments!)]” State v. Christie, 70 Haw. 158, 163 , 766 P.2d 1198, 1201 (1988), cert. denied, [490] U.S. [1067], 109 S.Ct. 2068 , 104 L.Ed.2d 633 (1989). 15 We held in State v. Lowther, 7 Haw.App. [20], 740 P.2d 1

2006We next note that our supreme court stated that “the use of the Intoxilyzer had been approved by the Director of Health and it met the Federal Standard for Devices to Measure Breath Alcohol.” State v. Tengan, 67 Haw. 451, 462 , 691 P.2d 365, 373 (1984). 14 Recently, citing Tengan , the supreme court reiterated that the Intoxi-lyzer 401 IAS was “approved for use by the county police departments!)]” State v. Christie, 70 Haw. 158, 163 , 766 P.2d 1198, 1201 (1988), cert. denied, [490] U.S. [1067], 109 S.Ct. 2068 , 104 L.Ed.2d 633 (1989). 15 We held in State v. Lowther, 7 Haw.App. [20], 740 P.2d 1

11
State v. Tengangreen
haw · 1984 · cited in 1 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 2006–2006
2 sentences

2006We next note that our supreme court stated that “the use of the Intoxilyzer had been approved by the Director of Health and it met the Federal Standard for Devices to Measure Breath Alcohol.” State v. Tengan, 67 Haw. 451, 462 , 691 P.2d 365, 373 (1984). 14 Recently, citing Tengan , the supreme court reiterated that the Intoxi-lyzer 401 IAS was “approved for use by the county police departments!)]” State v. Christie, 70 Haw. 158, 163 , 766 P.2d 1198, 1201 (1988), cert. denied, [490] U.S. [1067], 109 S.Ct. 2068 , 104 L.Ed.2d 633 (1989). 15 We held in State v. Lowther, 7 Haw.App. [20], 740 P.2d 1

2006We next note that our supreme court stated that “the use of the Intoxilyzer had been approved by the Director of Health and it met the Federal Standard for Devices to Measure Breath Alcohol.” State v. Tengan, 67 Haw. 451, 462 , 691 P.2d 365, 373 (1984). 14 Recently, citing Tengan , the supreme court reiterated that the Intoxi-lyzer 401 IAS was “approved for use by the county police departments!)]” State v. Christie, 70 Haw. 158, 163 , 766 P.2d 1198, 1201 (1988), cert. denied, [490] U.S. [1067], 109 S.Ct. 2068 , 104 L.Ed.2d 633 (1989). 15 We held in State v. Lowther, 7 Haw.App. [20], 740 P.2d 1

11
State v. Wilsongreen
haw · 1999 · cited in 1 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 2005–2005
2 sentences

2005See State v. Garcia, 96 Hawai`i 200, 208, 29 P.3d 919, 927 (2001) (Nakayama, J. dissenting, joined by Ramil, J.) (reiterating the exclusionary rule that remedy for violation of implied consent rule was exclusion of intoxilyzer test); State v. Wilson, 92 Hawai`i 45, 49, 987 P.2d 268, 272 (1999) (Nakayama, J. dissenting, joined by Ramil, J.) (announcing exclusionary rule and holding that implied consent law was intending to protect the rights of the driver "to enable the driver to knowingly and intelligently consent to or refuse a chemical alcohol test").

2005See State v. Garcia, 96 Hawai`i 200, 208, 29 P.3d 919, 927 (2001) (Nakayama, J. dissenting, joined by Ramil, J.) (reiterating the exclusionary rule that remedy for violation of implied consent rule was exclusion of intoxilyzer test); State v. Wilson, 92 Hawai`i 45, 49, 987 P.2d 268, 272 (1999) (Nakayama, J. dissenting, joined by Ramil, J.) (announcing exclusionary rule and holding that implied consent law was intending to protect the rights of the driver "to enable the driver to knowingly and intelligently consent to or refuse a chemical alcohol test").

11
State v. Garciagreen
haw · 2001 · cited in 1 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 2005–2005
2 sentences

2005See State v. Garcia, 96 Hawai`i 200, 208, 29 P.3d 919, 927 (2001) (Nakayama, J. dissenting, joined by Ramil, J.) (reiterating the exclusionary rule that remedy for violation of implied consent rule was exclusion of intoxilyzer test); State v. Wilson, 92 Hawai`i 45, 49, 987 P.2d 268, 272 (1999) (Nakayama, J. dissenting, joined by Ramil, J.) (announcing exclusionary rule and holding that implied consent law was intending to protect the rights of the driver "to enable the driver to knowingly and intelligently consent to or refuse a chemical alcohol test").

2005See State v. Garcia, 96 Hawai`i 200, 208, 29 P.3d 919, 927 (2001) (Nakayama, J. dissenting, joined by Ramil, J.) (reiterating the exclusionary rule that remedy for violation of implied consent rule was exclusion of intoxilyzer test); State v. Wilson, 92 Hawai`i 45, 49, 987 P.2d 268, 272 (1999) (Nakayama, J. dissenting, joined by Ramil, J.) (announcing exclusionary rule and holding that implied consent law was intending to protect the rights of the driver "to enable the driver to knowingly and intelligently consent to or refuse a chemical alcohol test").

11
State v. Severinogreen
haw · 1975 · cited in 1 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 1999–1999
2 sentences

1999State v. Severino, 56 Haw. 378, 380 , 537 P.2d 1187, 1189 (1975); see also State v. Gustafson, 54 Haw. 519, 520 , 511 P.2d 161, 162 (1973).

1999State v. Severino, 56 Haw. 378, 380 , 537 P.2d 1187, 1189 (1975); see also State v. Gustafson, 54 Haw. 519, 520 , 511 P.2d 161, 162 (1973).

11
State v. Gustafsongreen
haw · 1973 · cited in 1 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 1999–1999
2 sentences

1999State v. Severino, 56 Haw. 378, 380 , 537 P.2d 1187, 1189 (1975); see also State v. Gustafson, 54 Haw. 519, 520 , 511 P.2d 161, 162 (1973).

1999State v. Severino, 56 Haw. 378, 380 , 537 P.2d 1187, 1189 (1975); see also State v. Gustafson, 54 Haw. 519, 520 , 511 P.2d 161, 162 (1973).

11
United States v. Wesley G. Cranergreen
ca9 · 1981 · cited in 1 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 1985–1985
1 sentence

1985United States v. Craner, 652 F.2d 23, 26 (9th Cir. 1981).

11
Baker v. City of Fairbanksgreen
alaska · 1970 · cited in 1 Hawaii opinions naming this issue, 1985–1985
1 sentence

1985See, e.g., Baker v. City of Fairbanks, 471 P.2d 386 (Alaska 1970); State v. Gerber, 206 Neb. 75 , 291 N.W.2d 403 (1980); State v. Morgan, 598 S.W.2d 796 (Tenn. Crim.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Hawaii. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (9)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Lowther green
hawapp · 1987
2 sentences

2006We next note that our supreme court stated that “the use of the Intoxilyzer had been approved by the Director of Health and it met the Federal Standard for Devices to Measure Breath Alcohol.” State v. Tengan, 67 Haw. 451, 462 , 691 P.2d 365, 373 (1984). 14 Recently, citing Tengan , the supreme court reiterated that the Intoxi-lyzer 401 IAS was “approved for use by the county police departments!)]” State v. Christie, 70 Haw. 158, 163 , 766 P.2d 1198, 1201 (1988), cert. denied, [490] U.S. [1067], 109 S.Ct. 2068 , 104 L.Ed.2d 633 (1989). 15 We held in State v. Lowther, 7 Haw.App. [20], 740 P.2d 1

2006We stated that an Intoxilyzer test result is “not ‘unassailable[,]’ ” id. at [25], 740 P.2d at 1020 (quoting Keel v. State, 609 P.2d 555, 557 (Alaska 1980)), and that a DUI defendant has a “constitutional right to present all relevant evidence in his defense[.]” Id. at [26], 740 P.2d at 1021 (quoting State v. Vega, 12 Ohio St.3d 185, 190 , 465 N.E.2d 1303,1308 (1984) (dissenting opinion)). *326 Defendant therefore had the right through cross-examination of [police department criminalist] Hong to question the reliability of the Intoxilyzer, which utilizes a partition ratio of 2,100 to 1, and th

21989–2006
State v. O'BRIEN green
hawapp · 1985
2 sentences

1999A DUI violation is a criminal offense, see State v. O'Brien, 5 Haw.App. 491 , [497], 704 P.2d 905, 911 , aff'd, 68 Haw. [38], 704 P.2d 833 [883] (1985), whereas an implied consent violation is "civil in nature, and hearings before a district judge, pursuant to statute, are in the nature of administrative proceedings." (Emphasis in original).

1999A DUI violation is a criminal offense, see State v. O'Brien, 5 Haw.App. 491 , [497], 704 P.2d 905, 911 , aff'd, 68 Haw. [38], 704 P.2d 833 [883] (1985), whereas an implied consent violation is "civil in nature, and hearings before a district judge, pursuant to statute, are in the nature of administrative proceedings." (Emphasis in original).

21986–1999
Christie v. Hawaii green
scotus · 1989
1 sentence

2006We next note that our supreme court stated that “the use of the Intoxilyzer had been approved by the Director of Health and it met the Federal Standard for Devices to Measure Breath Alcohol.” State v. Tengan, 67 Haw. 451, 462 , 691 P.2d 365, 373 (1984). 14 Recently, citing Tengan , the supreme court reiterated that the Intoxi-lyzer 401 IAS was “approved for use by the county police departments!)]” State v. Christie, 70 Haw. 158, 163 , 766 P.2d 1198, 1201 (1988), cert. denied, [490] U.S. [1067], 109 S.Ct. 2068 , 104 L.Ed.2d 633 (1989). 15 We held in State v. Lowther, 7 Haw.App. [20], 740 P.2d 1

12006–2006
Washington v. First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n green
scotus · 1989
1 sentence

2006We next note that our supreme court stated that “the use of the Intoxilyzer had been approved by the Director of Health and it met the Federal Standard for Devices to Measure Breath Alcohol.” State v. Tengan, 67 Haw. 451, 462 , 691 P.2d 365, 373 (1984). 14 Recently, citing Tengan , the supreme court reiterated that the Intoxi-lyzer 401 IAS was “approved for use by the county police departments!)]” State v. Christie, 70 Haw. 158, 163 , 766 P.2d 1198, 1201 (1988), cert. denied, [490] U.S. [1067], 109 S.Ct. 2068 , 104 L.Ed.2d 633 (1989). 15 We held in State v. Lowther, 7 Haw.App. [20], 740 P.2d 1

12006–2006
State v. Nakata green
haw · 1994
2 sentences

1996In Nakata, 76 Hawai'i 360 , 878 P.2d 699 (1993), we held a first-offense DUI violation to be petty where a violator faced suspension of his or her license for ninety days, a fine of up to $1,000.00, compulsory rehabilitation and community service, and reimbursement for the cost of implementing the penalties.

1996In Nakata, 76 Hawai'i 360 , 878 P.2d 699 (1993), we held a first-offense DUI violation to be petty where a violator faced suspension of his or her license for ninety days, a fine of up to $1,000.00, compulsory rehabilitation and community service, and reimbursement for the cost of implementing the penalties.

11996–1996
State v. O'BRIEN green
haw · 1985
2 sentences

1994Relying on State v. O’Brien, 68 Haw. 38 , 704 P.2d 883 (1985), they each requested jury trials, and accordingly, the cases were transferred to the First Circuit Court.

1994Relying on State v. O’Brien, 68 Haw. 38 , 704 P.2d 883 (1985), they each requested jury trials, and accordingly, the cases were transferred to the First Circuit Court.

11994–1994
State v. Fedak red
hawapp · 1992
1 sentence

1992This court held that the HPD regulation was an internal regulation within the definition of HRS § 91-1(4), stating: [Although HPD sobriety roadblocks unquestionably impinge on a driver’s freedom of movement, [the HPD regulation’s] procedures are aimed at prescribing and controlling the police officer’s activities in order to minimize the intrusion on the driver’s rights. 9 Haw.

11992–1992
State v. Gerber green
neb · 1980
2 sentences

1985See, e.g., Baker v. City of Fairbanks, 471 P.2d 386 (Alaska 1970); State v. Gerber, 206 Neb. 75 , 291 N.W.2d 403 (1980); State v. Morgan, 598 S.W.2d 796 (Tenn. Crim.

1985See, e.g., Baker v. City of Fairbanks, 471 P.2d 386 (Alaska 1970); State v. Gerber, 206 Neb. 75 , 291 N.W.2d 403 (1980); State v. Morgan, 598 S.W.2d 796 (Tenn. Crim.

11985–1985
State v. Morgan green
tenncrimapp · 1979
1 sentence

1985See, e.g., Baker v. City of Fairbanks, 471 P.2d 386 (Alaska 1970); State v. Gerber, 206 Neb. 75 , 291 N.W.2d 403 (1980); State v. Morgan, 598 S.W.2d 796 (Tenn. Crim.

11985–1985

Statutes the citing opinions construe

HI § Haw. Rev. Stat. § 291-4 (9) HI § Haw. Rev. Stat. § 286-151 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

PA 69 (1989–2026) IL 49 (1985–2023) AZ 36 (1985–2026) GA 35 (1985–2023) VT 24 (1991–2024) FL 20 (1988–2015) KS 19 (1989–2021) MT 13 (1987–2024) HI 13 (1985–2009) CA 12 (1993–2024) MS 11 (1997–2023) OH 10 (2000–2017) WA 7 (1998–2017) TX 7 (2014–2015) SD 6 (1990–2020) TN 6 (1996–2013) CO 5 (2001–2020) ID 5 (1991–2026) WV 5 (2001–2015) KY 5 (2018–2026) UT 5 (2003–2016) NJ 3 (2013–2020) MD 3 (2015–2024) NE 3 (2002–2016) ND 3 (1985–2005) NV 2 (1987–2010) AK 2 (2010–2018) WY 2 (2004–2024) DE 2 (2016–2017)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check