Grandinetti v. Kimura

• Court: Hawaii Supreme Court
• Decided: September 6, 2012
• Docket: SCPW-12-0000698
• Status: Published

Opinion

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-12-0000698 06-SEP-2012 03:25 PM

NO. SCPW-12-0000698

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I

FRANCIS GRANDINETTI, Petitioner,

vs.

THE HONORABLE SHUNICHI KIMURA and THE HONORABLE RIKI

MAY AMANO, JUDGES OF THE CIRCUIT

COURT OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT, STATE OF HAWAI'I, Respondents.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

(CR. NO. 93-0141)

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

August 8, 2012 “Application for Habeas Corpus and Mandamus

Remedy”, which we review as a petition for a writ of habeas

corpus and a writ of mandamus, the documents attached thereto and

the record herein, it appears that petitioner is not entitled to

habeas or mandamus relief. 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). Moreover,

petitioner 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 ORDERED that the petition is denied.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, September 6, 2012.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr.

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Richard W. Pollack

-2­