 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Schilleci11/29/2005
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER
By: Burns, C.J., Lim and Nakamura, JJ.
Frank D. Schilleci (Defendant) appeals the May 14, 2004 judgment of the District Court of the First Circuit (district court) that convicted him of driving under the influence of an intoxicant.
After a painstaking review of the record and the briefs submitted by the parties, and giving careful consideration to the arguments advanced and the issues raised by the parties, we resolve Defendant's points of error on appeal as follows:
1. The district court did not err in permitting the arresting officer to identify the "clues" he detected in Defendant's performance on the standardized field sobriety tests, and to opine that Defendant failed. State v. Ito, 90 Hawaii 225, 240-41, 978 P.2d 191, 206-07 (App. 1999); State v. Ferrer, 95 Hawaii 409, 429-30, 23 P.3d 744, 764-65 (App. 2001).
2. Any error the district court may have committed in connection with the arresting officer's testimony about the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration manual was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Holbron, 80 Hawaii 27, 32, 904 P.2d 912, 917 (1995).
3. Any error the district court may have committed in refusing to take judicial notice of the printout from the Medline website was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Holbron, 80 Hawaii at 32, 904 P.2d at 917.
Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the district court's May 14, 2004 judgment is affirmed.
Page 1 Hawaii DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|