LIHUE — A request by probation staff to include an alcohol restriction to a probationer because “it would be helpful for him” was denied by a Kauai judge because it was not related to the underlying offense.
Dillon Taylor Eiland, 25, is serving a four-year term with Hawaii’s Opportunity Probation with Enforcement (HOPE) after he was sentenced in September 2015 for first-degree violation of privacy.
On July 19, HOPE probation staff filed a motion to include a condition for Taylor that he be restricted from drinking alcohol. Deputy Public Defender Stephanie Char said the request to modify the terms of his probation was baseless. She objected to the motion.
“(Probation) wants to add in the condition that he cannot drink alcohol,” Char said. “The condition needs to be reasonably related to the underlying offense for my client. There certainly was never indication that alcohol was used in the underlying offense. He’s 25 years old. It’s legal for him to drink alcohol. There is no indication that consummation of alcohol led to the underlying offense.”
The deputy prosecuting attorney deferred to the court and made no arguments, but did note that probation wanted to add the condition because “it would be helpful for him.”
The court agreed that there would need to be a factual basis within the case that substance abuse was a problem for the defendant for probation to impose the discretionary condition.
The court ruled that probation could not impose a condition stating there was no indication of substance abuse in the case and that the request to have prohibition on alcohol was not rationally related to what happened.
Based on the court’s review of the statutes and Hawaii Supreme Court case State v. Kahawai, the court denied probation’s motion to add the alcohol restriction to the terms and conditions of Eiland’s probation.