State v. Cermelj — driving-without-a-license conviction affirmed

Case
State of Hawai‘i v. Hope Louise Cermelj, also known as Hope Alohalani Cermelj
Court
Intermediate Court of Appeals of the State of Hawai‘i
Judge
Clyde J. Wadsworth (David Y. Ige, 2019); Kimberly T. Guidry (Josh Green, 2023)
Date Decided
July 31, 2026
Docket No.
CAAP-24-0000640
Topics
Criminal procedure, Right to counsel, Self-representation, Traffic offenses
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

After a bench trial, the District Court of the Third Circuit, North Kohala Division, found Hope Louise Cermelj guilty of driving a motor vehicle without a license. Cermelj represented herself at trial and appealed the August 29, 2024 judgment of conviction and sentence.

On appeal, Cermelj argued that the district court lacked jurisdiction because she was a sovereign person of the Kingdom of Hawaiʻi. She also contended that she was unconstitutionally denied the right to counsel.

The Court’s Holding

The Intermediate Court of Appeals affirmed. It held that Hawaiʻi courts have jurisdiction over persons operating motor vehicles on public roads in the State, including persons who claim citizenship in the Kingdom of Hawaiʻi rather than the State. The court also cited HRS § 701-106(1)(a), which provides for State jurisdiction over matters occurring within Hawaiʻi.

The court further held that Cermelj knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived counsel. At a preliminary hearing, she repeatedly declined both public-defender representation and the court’s offer to appoint private counsel. The district court reviewed the risks and consequences of self-representation, confirmed her understanding of a written waiver form, and considered her age, education, English proficiency, mental condition, and freedom from coercion.

Key Takeaways

  • A claim of Hawaiian Kingdom sovereignty does not exempt a motorist from Hawaiʻi laws governing public-road driving or defeat State court jurisdiction.
  • A defendant may waive counsel and proceed pro se if the waiver is knowing, intelligent, and voluntary.
  • The record supported the waiver where the court gave required advisories, offered substitute appointed counsel, and confirmed the defendant’s understanding.

Why It Matters

The decision applies established Hawaiʻi authority rejecting sovereignty-based jurisdictional challenges in traffic prosecutions. It also illustrates the record a trial court may create to support a valid waiver of counsel, particularly when a defendant insists on self-representation despite the availability of appointed counsel.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top