RELATING TO UNCREWED AIRCRAFT OFFENSES.
HB389 amends Hawaii’s criminal code provisions on uncrewed aircraft, or drones, to clarify and expand the offense of misuse of an uncrewed aircraft in the third degree. The bill specifies that a person commits the offense when they intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly tamper with a drone’s identification or registration number, interfere with police, deputy sheriff, or fire department personnel, cause bodily injury, damage another person’s property by more than $750, operate a drone while intoxicated, operate after a drone-operating license or privilege has been revoked or suspended, or use a drone in furtherance of a felony. It also states that a conviction under this section is separate from, and in addition to, any conviction for the underlying felony, though the sentences may run concurrently or consecutively.
The bill also revises an existing exemption in section 711-1121 so that certain criminal provisions do not apply to specified public safety personnel and others acting under government authority, including police officers, deputy sheriffs, adult corrections officers, correctional workers, fire department personnel, and persons acting under federal, state, or county authority or contract. The measure is described as part of the Honolulu Prosecuting Attorney Package and is aimed at clarifying which felony offenses are covered when a drone is used to facilitate criminal conduct.
HB389 amends sections 711-1121 and 711-1123 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes, tightening and clarifying the state’s drone-related criminal offenses and the scope of exemptions for government-authorized operators. It creates clearer statutory language for prosecuting misuse of uncrewed aircraft, especially when drones are used to assist felonies, and preserves separate punishment for the drone offense and the underlying felony. The bill affects drone operators, criminal defendants, law enforcement, fire personnel, and government contractors or agents authorized to use uncrewed aircraft.
The available voting history suggests broad support and little opposition. The Senate Transportation Committee passed the bill with amendments by a 3-0 vote, and the Senate Judiciary Committee passed it unanimously, 5-0, without amendment. No committee transcript is available, but the procedural record indicates the measure was viewed favorably and moved forward without recorded dissent.
The main substantive issue appears to be how broadly to define felony-related drone misuse and how to ensure the statute clearly captures offenses committed with uncrewed aircraft without overreaching. The bill’s clarification that drone use in furtherance of a felony is punishable in addition to the underlying felony may be significant for prosecutors and defense counsel. Another point of potential concern is the scope of exemptions for public safety personnel and government-authorized operators, though the bill’s text suggests these exemptions are intended to preserve legitimate official drone use rather than create a broader loophole.