Honolulu Prosecuting Attorney Peter Carlisle yesterday criticized a Hawai'i Supreme Court ruling this week that threw out a man's conviction for excessive speeding on technical grounds. Carlisle said the ruling was "much to-do about nothing."

But Carlisle did say that he believes the ruling will "open the floodgates" to more litigation by people cited for excessive speeding and will tie up the court system and cost taxpayers more money.

"It's going to open the door to claims that there should be even more procedures to follow," Carlisle said. "It's going to cost a lot more money. We're going to have to retrain police officers, and, all of it seems to me, frankly, if you think about the way the real world works rather than the legal world, it's much to-do about nothing."

Carlisle was reacting to a high court ruling released Wednesday that reversed the conviction of Abiye Assaye, who police alleged was driving 90 mph in a 55 mph zone on H-1 Freeway near the Radford overpass on Sept. 5, 2007. Assaye was pulled over by a police officer who had used a laser gun to clock Assaye's speed.

When he was convicted of violating the state's excessive-speeding law, District Judge Christopher McKenzie ordered Assaye to pay $787 in fines and fees and to perform 36 hours of community service, and suspended his driver's license for 30 days.

Assaye appealed the verdict to the state Intermediate Court of Appeals, claiming that prosecutors failed to prove the accuracy of the laser gun. The ICA upheld the lower court's judgment, but Assaye appealed to the state Supreme Court.

The high court disagreed with the two lower courts and ruled that there was no evidence presented at trial to show that HPD's laser gun testing practices conformed to the manufacturer's operating manual. The arresting officer testified that he was trained by a superior officer and had followed established HPD procedure to test the device.

But the court said that was not sufficient because it was not known if HPD's and the manufacturer's standards are the same. The justices ruled that the evidence from the laser gun should not have been admitted in court and since there was no other proof that Assaye was speeding, the justices overturned the verdict.

Carlisle said the simple solution is that police officers will now have to testify that their training was based on the manufacturer's recommendations. He said he believes this isn't necessary.

"I can't imagine who else would tell you how to use a laser gun other than the person who made it. But we now have to say it was the person who made it who gave them the steps on how to use it," he said. "Who's going to give you procedures to use a laser gun? Somebody from Mars?"

Carlisle said he agreed with the two lower court rulings on the matter and disagreed with the Supreme Court's written opinion.

"In my view of the world, this is an example of the rule of rules, rather than the rule of law," he said.

State deputy public defender Ronette Kawakami on Wednesday said the ruling will affect dozens of excessive speeding cases that are on appeal. Kawakami, whose office represented Assaye, believes these cases also should be dismissed because prosecutors failed to prove the accuracy of the laser guns.

Carlisle agreed that many of these cases are in jeopardy because of the ruling.

"The ones that are in the pipe now that have already been decided and have this flaw, it's now time for the defense to jump on the wagon," he said.