Background
Josue Macario Reyes Pesquera pleaded no contest to Operating a Vehicle under the Influence of an Intoxicant (OVUII) in violation of Hawaii Revised Statutes § 291E-61(a)(1) in the District Court of the Third Circuit, North and South Kona Division. As part of his sentence, he was required to complete a substance abuse assessment and any recommended treatment. A $250 Drug Demand Reduction Fee was taken under advisement for one year, subject to being waived upon successful completion of those requirements.
Following sentencing in February 2024, the district court scheduled a series of proof-of-compliance hearings — held in March, May, July, and August 2024 — to monitor Reyes Pesquera’s progress with the substance abuse conditions. Reyes Pesquera moved to strike those hearings, arguing the court lacked authority to impose them. The district court denied the motion in a September 5, 2024 order, prompting this appeal.
The Court’s Holding
The Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals reversed the district court’s Compliance Hearings Order, holding that the district court exceeded its statutory authority under HRS § 291E-61 by requiring Reyes Pesquera to appear for proof-of-compliance hearings. The court found merit in Reyes Pesquera’s argument that such hearings constitute a form of court supervision not authorized by the OVUII statute and amount to an unauthorized use of probation-like monitoring.
The ICA grounded its decision in its recent opinion in State v. Rivero-Garcia, No. CAAP-24-0000637, 2026 WL 1582067 (Haw. App. June 3, 2026), applying the same analysis to conclude that district courts have no statutory basis under HRS § 291E-61 to conduct ongoing compliance hearings as a mechanism for supervising a defendant’s fulfillment of substance abuse treatment conditions.
Key Takeaways
- District courts in Hawaii lack authority under HRS § 291E-61 to impose proof-of-compliance hearings to monitor OVUII defendants’ substance abuse treatment — such supervision has no statutory basis in the OVUII statute.
- Scheduling recurring compliance hearings in OVUII cases functions as an unauthorized form of probation-like oversight, beyond the sentencing tools the legislature provided.
- This decision follows directly from State v. Rivero-Garcia (Haw. App. June 3, 2026), signaling that the ICA is applying this rule consistently across similar OVUII sentencing disputes.
Why It Matters
This decision places a clear limit on district court creativity in structuring OVUII sentences. Judges who have routinely used compliance hearings as an informal supervisory tool — particularly to ensure defendants follow through on substance abuse treatment conditions — must now look to express statutory authority before doing so. The ruling reinforces that sentencing practices, even well-intentioned ones, must be grounded in legislative authorization.
Defense practitioners handling OVUII matters in Hawaii should be aware that compliance hearings imposed without statutory authority are now squarely challengeable under this line of cases. Prosecutors and courts will need to assess whether any ongoing compliance monitoring in pending OVUII cases is similarly vulnerable to reversal.