Opinion ID: 4566481
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: facts

Text: The State charged Voorhees with six offenses: (1) Operating a Vehicle Under the Influence of an Intoxicant (OVUII), in violation of Hawai‘i Revised Statutes (HRS) § 291E61(a)(1) (Supp. 2019); (2) Driving without a License, in violation of HRS § 286-102(b) (Supp. 2018); (3) Conditions of Operation and Registration of Motor Vehicles, in violation of HRS § 431:10C-104(a) (2005); (4) Resisting Arrest, in violation of HRS § 710-1026(1) (2014); (5) Refusal to Submit to a Breath, Blood, or Urine Test, in violation of HRS §§ 291E-11 (2007), 291E-15 (Supp. 2016), and 291E-68 (Supp. 2016); and (6) Obedience to Police Officers, in violation of HRS § 291C-23 (2007). 2 Voorhees pled not guilty and his attorney informed the 2 Under HRS § 806-60 (2014), Voorhees was only entitled to a jury trial on the Resisting Arrest charge because it is a misdemeanor that carries up to one-year imprisonment. See HRS § 710-1026 (2014); HRS § 706-663 (Supp. 2016). 2 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER district court that Voorhees had completed a jury trial waiver form for his Resisting Arrest charge. The district court then conducted the following colloquy with Voorhees: Court: Mr. Voorhees, have you talked to your attorney about your right to a jury trial? Voorhees: Yes. Court: Do you understand what a jury trial is? Voorhees: Yes. Court: Do you wish to give up your right to a jury trial? Voorhees: Yes. Court: Did you read and understand this written waiver form? Voorhees: Yes, I did. Court: Are these your initials in paragraphs 2 through 6? Voorhees: Yes, they are. Court: Is this your signature on the back? Voorhees: Yes. Court: If you give up your right to a jury, the trial will be held in this court without a jury. Do you understand? Voorhees: Yes. Court: Ms. Gibson, do you certify that your client’s waiver is made knowingly and voluntarily? Counsel: I so certify. Court: I’ll accept this waiver and order defendant to return November 4th at 2 o’clock for a pretrial conference. On his jury trial waiver form, filed September 30, 2013, Voorhees signed his initials to confirm his understanding that a jury is composed of twelve people — whom he would 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER participate in selecting — who will decide whether he is guilty or not guilty, and will have to unanimously agree for there to be a conviction. Additionally, Voorhees initialed the document to indicate his understanding that giving up his right to a jury trial means that a judge alone will determine if he is guilty; Voorhees initialed to confirm that this is what he wanted. On the form, Voorhees’s attorney also completed a certificate of counsel, certifying that she read and fully explained the waiver information to Voorhees and believed that he understood the entire document. Following a bench trial, the district court found Voorhees not guilty of count 6, failing to obey police officers, but guilty of (1) OVUII, (2) Driving without a License, (3) Conditions of Operation and Registration of Motor Vehicles, (4) Resisting Arrest, and (5) Refusal to Submit to a Breath, Blood, or Urine Test. 3 Voorhees appealed. Before the ICA, Voorhees argued, inter alia, that the district court erred by failing to conduct a proper colloquy to determine whether Voorhees’s jury trial waiver was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary. In its memorandum opinion, the ICA 3 The ICA properly vacated Voorhees’s conviction as to count five because “the State concede[d] that after Voorhees was arrested, Officer Pa did not inform him of the sanctions under HRS §§ 291E-41 or 291E-65.” 4 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI‘I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER concluded that Voorhees’s jury trial waiver was valid. Voorhees filed a timely application for certiorari.