Grandinetti v. Bobby Ross Group, Inc.
This text of Grandinetti v. Bobby Ross Group, Inc. (Grandinetti v. Bobby Ross Group, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Hawaii Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-13-0000021 06-FEB-2013 10:05 AM
SCPW-13-0000021
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
FRANCIS P. GRANDINETTI, aka FRANCIS GRANDINETTI III, aka FRANCIS ANTHONY GRANDINETTI II, with numerous "private ID" names and aliases, a Hawai#i and New York federal citizen, Petitioner,
vs.
BOBBY ROSS GROUP, INC. (BRG), RICH INTERNATIONAL AIRWAYS, and SEVERAL TEXAS AGENTS FOR NEWTON COUNTY, ET AL., FORMER SHERIFF BOBBY ROSS, GOVERNOR GEORGE BUSH, (TEXAS), DOMINION MANAGEMENT, AN OKLAHOMA AGENT, Class-Respondents.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AND WRIT OF MANDAMUS (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ.)
Upon consideration of petitioner Francis Grandinetti’s
“Supervisory Habeas Corpus and Writ of Mandamus Petition: Texas
Arrest”, which was filed on January 10, 2013, and which we review
as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus and a writ of mandamus,
the documents attached thereto and submitted in support thereof,
and the record, it is unclear what specific relief petitioner
seeks by way of his petition. Nevertheless, petitioner presents
no special reason for invoking the supreme court’s original jurisdiction, see Oili v. Chang, 57 Haw. 411, 412, 557 P.2d 787,
788 (1976) (the supreme court “will not exercise its original
jurisdiction in habeas corpus proceedings when relief is
available in a lower court and no special reason exists for
invoking its jurisdiction”), and fails to demonstrate a clear and
indisputable right to relief, see Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai#i 200,
204, 982 P.2d 334, 338 (1999) (a writ of mandamus is an
extraordinary remedy that will not issue unless the petitioner
demonstrates a clear and indisputable right to relief and a lack
of alternative means to redress adequately the alleged wrong or
obtain the requested action). Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the clerk of the appellate
court shall process the petition for a writ of habeas corpus and
a writ of mandamus without payment of the filing fee.
IT IS FURTHER HEREBY ORDERED that the petition is
denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, February 6, 2013.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr.
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Richard W. Pollack
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Grandinetti v. Bobby Ross Group, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grandinetti-v-bobby-ross-group-inc-haw-2013.