Nobriga, 10 Haw.App. at 357-58 , 873 P.2d at 112-13 (footnote and brackets omitted) (emphasis added). In State v. Lee, 90 Hawai'i 130 , 976 P.2d 444 (1999), the Hawañ Supreme Court applied the Nobriga framework to a statute defining the offense of driving without insurance that was very similar in structure to the statute defining the offense of driving without a license at issue in this case. Similar to the DWOL statute, the statute defining the offense of driving without insurance, HRS § 431:100-104 (1993), contained an exception for drivers that were self-insured.
Domut contends that evidence adduced by the State that he was transporting two passengers in the vehicle, that he was not on that date and never was the registered owner of the vehicle, and that the vehicle's registration was current provided evidence of the "good faith lack of knowledge defense," shifting the burden to the State to disprove the defense beyond a reasonable doubt. As indicated by the ICA, we held in State v. Lee, 90 Hawai‘i 130, 976 P.2d 444 (1999), that the defendant bears the burden of production that they had borrowed a vehicle owned by another. Lee, 90 Hawai‘i at 140, 976 P.2d at 454.
He thus asserts that the charge was deficient without such allegations being included. To the contrary, the State argues under State v. Romano, 114 Hawai‘i 1, 155 P.3d 1102 (2007), State v. Lee, 90 Hawai‘i 130, 976 P.2d 444 (App.1999), and State v. Nobriga, 10 Haw.App. 353, 873 P.2d 110 (1994), overruled on other grounds by State v. Maelega, 80 Hawai‘i 172, 178–79, 907 P.2d 758, 764–65 (1995), that because the exceptions contained in other provisions are only referenced in HRS § 286–102 and are not an integral part of defining the DWOL offense, they are defenses and not part of the elements of the offense. We need not decide for purposes of this case whether a required element of the DWOL offense is that Stone “was not excepted by statute from the driver's licensing requirements.”
1. The Operating-a-Motor-Vehicle-with-No-Motor-Vehicle-Insurance-Policy Offense Tarape relies on this court's ruling in State v. Shamp, 86 Hawai`i 331, 949 P.2d 171 (App. 1997) (overruled on other grounds by State v. Lee, 90 Hawai`i 130, 976 P.2d 444 (1999)), in arguing that there was insufficient evidence that she operated a motor vehicle without a motor vehicle insurance policy. InShamp, the borrower of a motor vehicle was convicted of operating the vehicle without a no-fault insurance policy.
Id. at 247, 398 P.3d at 836.To support its interpretation, the ICA discussed State v. Lee, 90 Hawai‘i 130, 976 P.2d 444 (1999). Id. at 246-47, 398 P.3d at 835-36.
State v. Buch, 83 Haw. 308, 321, 926 P.2d 599, 612 (1996) (citation omitted). State v. Mattiello, 90 Haw. 255, 259, 978 P.2d 693, 697 (1999) (quoting State v. Stocker, 90 Haw. 85, 90, 976 P.2d 399, 404 (1999) (quoting State v. Lee, 90 Haw. 130, 134, 976 P.2d 444, 448, reconsideration denied (1999) (quoting State v. Bautista, 86 Haw. 207, 210, 948 P.2d 1048, 1051 (1997)))) (brackets in original). H. Plain Error
State v. Castillon, 140 Hawai'i 242, 247, 398 P.3d 831, 836 (App. 2017), cert. granted, No. SCWC-16-0000421, 2017 WL 5899258 (Haw. Nov. 29, 2017) (citing State v. Lee, 90 Hawai'i 130, 138, 976 P.2d 444, 452 (1999)). Instead, we held that the statutory exemptions in HRS § 286-102(a) constitute defenses to the DWOL offense.
” State v. Lee, 90 Hawai'i 130 , 138, 976 P.2d 444 , 452 (1999) (quot*186 ing State v. Bautista, 86 Hawai'i 207 , 209, 948 P.2d 1048 , 1050 (1997) (brackets omitted)). “Yet, even if the plain language of a statute is clear, [the Hawai'i Supreme Court] can nevertheless consider legislative history to ensure its interpretation of the statute does not produce an absurd result contrary to legislative intent.”
The Hawaii Supreme Court has adopted and applied the Nobriga framework. See State v. Jenkins, 93 Hawai'i 87 , 106-07, 997 P.2d 13 , 32-33 (2000); State v. Lee, 90 Hawai'i 130 , 137-39, 976 P.2d 444 , 451-53 (1999). B.
State v. Bolosan, 78 Hawai‘i 86, 89, 890 P.2d 673, 676 (1995). See also, State v. Lee, 90 Hawai‘i 130, 139–40, 976 P.2d 444, 453–54 (1999) (prosecution need not disprove self insurance unless some evidence of that defense has been introduced). At trial, Attaguile did state that he was not aware whether the subject vehicle, which he claimed belonged to his brother, was insured.