Akiona v. Administrative Director of the Courts

CourtHawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals
DecidedNovember 7, 2025
DocketCAAP-23-0000546
StatusPublished

This text of Akiona v. Administrative Director of the Courts (Akiona v. Administrative Director of the Courts) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Akiona v. Administrative Director of the Courts, (hawapp 2025).

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX 07-NOV-2025 08:02 AM Dkt. 42 SO NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I

BRANDON M.K. AKIONA, Petitioner-Appellant, v. ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR OF THE COURTS, Respondent-Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT HONOLULU DIVISION (CASE NO. 1DAA-23-00004)

SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER (By: Nakasone, Chief Judge, Leonard and Wadsworth, JJ.) Petitioner-Appellant Brandon Akiona (Akiona) appeals

from the September 1, 2023 Judgment on Appeal (Judgment) entered

by the District Court of the First Circuit, Honolulu Division

(District Court).1 Akiona also challenges the District Court's

September 1, 2023 Decision and Order Sustaining Administrative

Revocation.

Akiona raises a single point of error on appeal,

contending that the District Court erred when it ruled that the

police do not have an affirmative duty to provide a legal way to

avoid a police DUI roadblock.

1 The Honorable Shellie K. Park-Hoapili presided. NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Upon careful review of the record and the briefs

submitted by the parties, and having given due consideration to

the arguments advanced and the issues raised by the parties, we

resolve Akiona's point of error as follows:

Akiona argues, variously, that the plurality opinion in

State v. Heapy, 113 Hawai i 283, 151 P.3d 764 (2007), must be

interpreted to require that police officers, when erecting a DUI

roadblock, provide a driver approaching the roadblock with a way

to legally avoid the roadblock and sufficient notice so that the

driver can avail themself of that legal route.

Akiona does not cite to, nor do we find, language in

the plurality opinion, the concurring opinion, or the cases

discussed in Heapy that holds that police must provide motorists

with a legal method of avoiding a roadblock. Although we

recognize, as the plurality recognized in Heapy, that the Hawai i

Constitution provides greater protections against unreasonable

search and seizure, as well as greater privacy rights, these

protections have not been held to include an alternative route by

which a driver can avoid a roadblock. See generally Heapy, 113

Hawai i 283, 151 P.3d 764; see also Respicio v. Admin. Dir. of

Cts., CAAP-17-851, 2019 WL 2121300, at *1 (Haw. App. May 15,

2019) (SDO) (holding that Heapy does not require police to

provide alternate, legal route to avoid roadblock). Accordingly,

we conclude that the District Court did not err in concluding

that police do not have an affirmative duty to provide a legal

way to avoid a DUI roadblock.

2 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Therefore, the District Court's September 1, 2023

Judgment is affirmed.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai i, November 7, 2025.

/s/ Karen T. Nakasone Chief Judge

/s/ Katherine G. Leonard Associate Judge

/s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth Associate Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State v. Heapy
151 P.3d 764 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Akiona v. Administrative Director of the Courts, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/akiona-v-administrative-director-of-the-courts-hawapp-2025.