Jenkins v. Hawaii Paroling Authority Official
This text of Jenkins v. Hawaii Paroling Authority Official (Jenkins v. Hawaii Paroling Authority Official) 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-13-0002897 27-AUG-2013 01:53 PM
SCPW-13-0002897
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
WENDELL H. JENKINS, Petitioner,
vs.
HAWAI#I PAROLING AUTHORITY OFFICIAL, Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (CR. NO. 96-0127)
ORDER DENYING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ.)
Upon consideration of petitioner Wendell H. Jenkins’
application for a writ of mandamus, filed on August 19, 2013, the
documents attached thereto and submitted in support thereof, and
the record, it appears that petitioner fails to demonstrate a
clear and indisputable right to a second parole revocation
hearing and has alternative means to obtain relief. Petitioner,
therefore, is not entitled to the requested writ of mandamus.
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); In
re Disciplinary Bd. of Hawai#i Supreme Court, 91 Hawai#i 363, 368,
984 P.2d 688, 693 (1999) (mandamus relief is available to compel
an official to perform a duty allegedly owed to an individual
only if the individual’s claim is clear and certain, the
official’s duty is ministerial and so plainly prescribed as to be
free from doubt, and no other remedy is available). Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the clerk of the appellate
court shall process the application for a writ of mandamus
without payment of the filing fee.
IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the application for a
writ of mandamus is denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, August 27, 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
Jenkins v. Hawaii Paroling Authority Official, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jenkins-v-hawaii-paroling-authority-official-haw-2013.