ICA affirms suppression of evidence in intoxicated driving case

On June 21, 2011, the Hawai’i Intermediate Court of Appeals entered its opinion in State v. Sereno, No. 30468 (Summary Disposition Order- unpublished, panel: Fujise, Presiding J., Leonard and Reifurth, JJ.). This case is an appeal from the District Court of the Second Circuit, Wailuku division, Hon. Kelsey T. Kawano presiding. On the briefs were Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Kristen L. Coccaro, Esq. for Plaintiff-Appellant and Matthew Nardi, Esq. for Defendant-Appellee.

Defendant was operating an automobile that was struck by another vehicle and, as a result, Defendant’s vehicle collided with a house. Defendant was arrested for operating a vehicle under the influence of an intoxicant. Prior to trial, Defendant filed a motion to suppress all evidence obtained as a result of Defendant’s arrest because of lack of probable cause to make the arrest. The trial court granted this motion.

On appeal, the State challenged many of the findings of fact and conclusions of law entered by the trial court in making its decision. Applying the “clear error” test to factual determinations made by the court in deciding pretrial motions and the “right/wrong” test to determinations of law, the ICA did find various errors. These errors, however, did not rise to a level of requiring reversal.

The ICA noted that as to the ultimate conclusion of whether probable cause existed for the arrest, the factors that were reasonable for the officer to consider in his determination of probable cause were Defendant's admission of drinking, the odor of an alcoholic beverage, red, watery eyes, and flushed facial features. Based on these factors, the ICA agreed that insufficient probable cause existed for the arrest. Affirmed.