State of Hawai'I, Petitioner/plaintiff-Appellee v. Carson Lalepa Wheeler, Respondent/defendant-Appellant

Summary

The Hawai'i Supreme Court affirmed the Intermediate Court of Appeals' judgment vacating Wheeler's conviction for operating a vehicle under the influence of an intoxicant (OVUII), concluding that operation of a vehicle upon a public way, street, road, or highway is an essential attendant circumstance—and therefore an element—of the offense under HRS §§ 291E-61(a)(1) and 291E-1. Because the oral charge tracked the statute without alleging that element, and because 'operate' is statutorily defined in a manner that departs from its commonly understood meaning, the charge failed to give Wheeler, a person of common understanding, notice of the nature and cause of the accusation. The court rejected the State's contention that its earlier decisions in Ruggiero and Kekuewa required a contrary result, reasoning that those holdings were limited to the issues actually decided and that neither defendant had timely objected to the sufficiency of the charge as Wheeler did.