Justices to rule on DUI alerts

By William Cole
Advertiser Courts Writer

Mothers Against Drunk Driving said yesterday it is concerned that a case before the Hawai'i Supreme Court could compromise the prosecution of suspected drunken drivers based on anonymous calls to police.

The Supreme Court is expected to decide on a case involving Leslie G.O.K. Guernsey, who was stopped and arrested for drunken driving in Hawai'i Kai by a Honolulu police officer in January 1999, according to MADD.

The officer had followed up on a call from a motorist who said Guernsey's vehicle was weaving on the road and almost cut her off, according to court documents.

Guernsey initially was convicted of drunken driving, but appealed, claiming an illegal stop was made.

The Intermediate Court of Appeals overturned the conviction, but the Supreme Court granted a request by the city prosecutor's office to review the appeals court's decision.

"We hope the court will find that law enforcement has the right — and even an obligation — to act on information from anonymous callers when public safety is an issue," said Carol McNamee, co-founder of MADD-Hawai'i and national vice president of MADD.

Taryn Tomasa, Guernsey's deputy public defender in the appeals court case, could not be reached for comment yesterday.

Guernsey yesterday said he no longer drinks and drives.

"I'm just trying to lead my life," he said. "I'm not trying to hurt anybody."

In its ruling, the appeals court said that by itself, an anonymous informant's report of unlawful activity is insufficient to generate reasonable suspicion.

"There must be other evidence that by itself or combined with the anonymous informant's report would lead a police officer to reasonably suspect that criminal activity was (being committed)," the appeals court found.