State v. Anderson

Summary

The Supreme Court of Hawaiʻi held that the Intermediate Court of Appeals erred in affirming Anderson’s convictions because its decision was inconsistent with State v. Wheeler regarding the sufficiency of the operating-under-the-influence charge. The court vacated the appellate and district court judgments and remanded for further proceedings concerning the charge and the appropriate statute-of-limitations remedy. A dissent concluded that the defective oral charge deprived the district court of jurisdiction.

Holdings

1. The Intermediate Court of Appeals gravely erred in affirming the district court judgment because its decision was obviously inconsistent with State v. Wheeler.
2. The case must be remanded to the district court to permit the parties to more fully develop the record and for the district court to determine whether dismissal of the OVUII charge should be with or without prejudice.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the OVUII charge was legally sufficient without alleging that Anderson operated the vehicle on a public way, street, road, or highway.
2. Whether the appropriate remedy for the allegedly time-barred original OVUII charge was dismissal with prejudice or dismissal without prejudice.

Disposition

vacated