Legal Opinion

State v. Maharaj

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided November 18, 2013No. SCWC-29520PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion of the Court by

ACOBA, J.

We hold that the charge for Operating a Vehicle Under the Influence of an Intoxicant, (OVUII), HRS § 261E-61(a)(l) (2007) was insufficient because Respondent/Plaintiff-Ap-pellee the State of Hawai'i (the State) failed to allege the requisite states of mind of intentional, knowing, or reckless in the charge, State v. Apollonio, 130 Hawai'i 353, 358-59, 311 P.3d 676, 681-82 (2013); see also State v. Nesmith, 127 Hawai'i 48, 54, 276 P.3d 617, 623 (2012) 1 and because the charge failed to allege an “essential fact[] constituting the offense charged.” Hawai'i Rules…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Henderson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2013
  2. State v. VlietHawaii Supreme Court · 2001
  3. State v. ElliottHawaii Supreme Court · 1994
  4. State v. MottaHawaii Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Chun v. Employees' Retirement SystemHawaii Supreme Court · 1992

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State of Tennessee v. Christopher MinorTennessee Supreme Court · 2018
  2. State of Tennessee v. Christopher Minor - ConcurringTennessee Supreme Court · 2018
  3. State v. PaiHawaii Supreme Court · 2014
  4. State v. PierceHawaii Supreme Court · 2014
  5. State v. RiveraHawaii Supreme Court · 2014

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API