Honolulu, Hawaii
                                                     , 1999

                                   RE:  S.B. No. 674
                                        S.D. 1

Honorable Norman Mizuguchi
President of the Senate
Twentieth State Legislature
Regular Session of 1999
State of Hawaii


     Your Committee on Transportation and Intergovernmental
Affairs, to which was referred S.B. No. 674 entitled: 


begs leave to report as follows:

     The purpose of this measure is to clarify that a police
roadblock is not invalidated by a failure to comply with police
procedures that exceed the minimum statutory roadblock

     Testimony in support of this measure was received from the
Department of Transportation, Governor's Highway Safety Council,
Department of the Prosecuting Attorney for the City and County of
Honolulu, City and County of Honolulu Police Department (HPD),
County of Maui Police Department, and Mothers Against Drunk

     Testimony indicated that a number of court cases involving
roadblocks have been dismissed in both criminal and
administrative driver's license revocation cases due to
"technical" violations of police procedures.  Under section 286-
162.6, Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS), roadblocks must meet
certain minimum requirements.  In some instances, however, police
procedures exceed the minimum requirements set forth in section
286-162.6, HRS.  

     In State v. Fedak, 9 Haw. 98 (1992), the Hawaii Intermediate
Court of Appeals found that a roadblock conducted by HPD was

a                                                     SB674 SD1
                                   STAND. COM. REP. NO. 240
                                   Page 2

invalid because the officer in charge of the roadblock had
changed its location to avoid traffic congestion.  Although the
roadblock in question complied with section 286-162.6, HRS, the
court found that it did not comply with HPD's internal
regulations because the regulations did not provide any authority
for changing the location of the roadblock.  Thus, even though
all statutory requirements for the roadblock were met and the
roadblock was changed for a legitimate safety concern, the
roadblock was invalid.

     Your Committee finds that the ruling in State v. Fedak was
not the intended application of section 286-162.6, HRS.  Your
Committee further finds that this measure clarifies that failure
to comply with roadblock police procedures that exceed the
minimum statutory requirements of section 286-162.6, HRS, does
not invalidate the roadblock.

     Your Committee has amended this bill by making a technical,
nonsubstantive amendment.

     As affirmed by the record of votes of the members of your
Committee on Transportation and Intergovernmental Affairs that is
attached to this report, your Committee is in accord with the
intent and purpose of S.B. No. 674, as amended herein, and
recommends that it pass Second Reading in the form attached
hereto as S.B. No. 674, S.D. 1, and be referred to the Committee
on Judiciary.

                                   Respectfully submitted on
                                   behalf of the members of the
                                   Committee on Transportation
                                   and Intergovernmental Affairs,

                                   CAL KAWAMOTO, Chair

a                                                     SB674 SD1