State v. Lee

61 Citing cases

  1. State v. Castillon

    140 Haw. 242 (Haw. Ct. App. 2017)   Cited 6 times
    Holding that the HRS section 286-102 exceptions are not elements of the DWOL offense, but are defenses for which the defendant must first offer evidence before the burden shifts to the prosecution to disprove

    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.

  2. State v. Domut

    457 P.3d 822 (Haw. 2020)   Cited 2 times

    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.

  3. State v. Stone

    128 Haw. 131 (Haw. Ct. App. 2012)

    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.”

  4. State v. Tarape

    115 P.3d 698 (Haw. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 3 times

    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.

  5. State v. Castillon

    443 P.3d 98 (Haw. 2019)   Cited 15 times

    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.

  6. State v. Jenkins

    93 Haw. 87 (Haw. 2000)   Cited 214 times
    Holding that possession is a prosecutable act under HRS § 702–202

    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

  7. State v. Domut

    NO. CAAP-16-0000402 (Haw. Ct. App. Jul. 30, 2018)

    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.

  8. State v. Bowman

    135 Haw. 180 (Haw. Ct. App. 2015)   Cited 1 times

    ” 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.”

  9. State v. Turping

    136 Haw. 333 (Haw. Ct. App. 2015)   Cited 14 times
    Holding that the statutory exception for denatured or other non-potable alcohol is a defense to and not an element of the offense of operating a vehicle under the influence of an intoxicant

    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.

  10. State v. Attaguile

    294 P.3d 1091 (Haw. Ct. App. 2013)

    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.