Court Opinion

ID: 9404977
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-26 20:04:55.139072+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:38.140352
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

                                                  Electronically Filed
                                                  Intermediate Court of Appeals
                                                  CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
                                                  26-JUN-2023
                                                  08:32 AM
                                                  Dkt. 71 SO

                           NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

                 IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

                         OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

                STATE OF HAWAI#I, Plaintiff-Appellee,
                                  v.
                 ALANA WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant

         APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT
                           WAILUKU DIVISION
                       (CASE NO. 2DTA-21-00989)

                      SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER
   (By:    Hiraoka, Presiding Judge, Nakasone and McCullen, JJ.)

            Defendant-Appellant Alana Williams appeals from the
"Judgment and Notice of Entry of Judgment" entered by the
District Court of the Second Circuit, Wailuku Division, on
March 18, 2022.1 For the reasons explained below, we affirm.
          The facts relevant to this appeal are undisputed. On
October 29, 2021, Williams was arrested in a parking lot in
Kīhei, Maui, Hawai#i for operating a vehicle under the influence
of an intoxicant. On November 18, 2021, Williams was charged by
complaint with one count of Operating a Vehicle Under the
Influence of an Intoxicant (OVUII) in violation of Hawaii Revised
Statutes (HRS) § 291E-61(a)(1) and/or (3) and subject to HRS
§ 291E-61(b)(1) and (b)(4).       The complaint was signed by a deputy

     1
            The Honorable Christopher M. Dunn presided.
   NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

prosecuting attorney (DPA).        Williams pleaded not guilty on
November 30, 2021.
          A pretrial conference was held on December 17, 2021.
The State orally moved to amend the complaint. The motion was
granted over Williams' objection. On December 27, 2021, Williams
filed a motion to dismiss for failure to comply with HRS § 805-1.
An amended complaint was filed on December 28, 2021. It
contained a declaration by the DPA. Williams' motion to dismiss
was heard on January 20, 2022. The motion was denied. The
district court entered "Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and
Order Denying Motion to Dismiss" on January 31, 2022.2
          A bench trial was conducted on March 18, 2022.
Williams was found guilty as charged. The Judgment was entered
on March 18, 2022. This appeal followed.
          Williams contends that the district court erred by
denying her motion to dismiss the complaint and amended
complaint. She relies on State v. Thompson, 150 Hawai#i 262,
266, 500 P.3d 447, 451 (2021). In Thompson, the supreme court
held that HRS § 805-1 required that a criminal complaint be
"subscribed by the complainant under oath . . . or . . . by
declaration in accordance with the rules of court." Id. at 267,
500 P.3d at 452. But the supreme court later restricted its
holding in Thompson, and held that HRS § 805-1 applies only to
criminal complaints used to obtain a penal summons or arrest
warrant. State v. Mortensen-Young, 152 Hawai#i 385, 399, 526
P.3d 362, 376 (2023).3 "[T]he requirements of HRS § 805-1 do not
apply to complaints used to charge a defendant who has already
been arrested." Id. at 397, 526 P.3d at 374.
          Williams was arrested for OVUII and then charged by
complaint. Thus, Hawai#i Rules of Penal Procedure (HRPP)
Rule 7(d) applies.      Mortensen-Young, 152 Hawai#i at 399, 526 P.3d

      2
             The Honorable Blaine J. Kobayashi presided.
      3
             Mortensen-Young was decided after briefing in this appeal was
completed.

                                       2
  NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

at 376. HRPP Rule 7(d) requires that a complaint be signed by
the prosecutor. The complaint in this case was, as were the
complaints at issue in Mortensen-Young, in compliance with HRPP
Rule 7(d). The district court did not err by denying Williams'
motion to dismiss. Williams asserts no other points of error.
          For the foregoing reasons, the "Judgment and Notice of
Entry of Judgment" entered by the district court on March 18,
2022, is affirmed.
          DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, June 26, 2023.

On the briefs:
                                      /s/ Keith K. Hiraoka
Matthew S. Kohm,                      Presiding Judge
for Defendant-Appellant.
                                      /s/ Karen T. Nakasone
Gerald K. Enriques,                   Associate Judge
Deputy Prosecuting Attorney,
County of Maui,                       /s/ Sonja M.P. McCullen
for Plaintiff-Appellee.               Associate Judge

                                  3