Hawaii Supreme Court· 11/17/2009

State v. Wheeler

Citations

219 P.3d 1170
121 Haw. 383
2009 Haw. LEXIS 288

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that the term \operate\ has been statutorily defined in a manner that does not comport with its commonly understood definition, thereby rendering the underlying oral charge, which did not define the term, insufficient
holding that “the sufficiency of the charging instrument is measured, inter alia, by whether it contains the elements of the offense intended to be charged, and sufficiently apprises the defendant of what [they] must be prepared to meet”
observing that Motta/Wells rule applies when defendants challenge charges “subsequent to a conviction”
rejecting the State’s contention that this Court had already decided in Ruggiero and Kekuewa that a charge omitting the public-road element is legally sufficient
rejecting the State’s contention that this Court had already decided in Ruggiero and Kekuewa that a charge omitting the public-road element is legally sufficient
affirming ICA’s decision to vacate and remand with instructions to dismiss without prejudice based on defective charge

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Moon, Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy, Recktenwald

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

134 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

35 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named State v. Wheeler

214 other CourtListener records share this case name; the 50 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.