Judd v. State of Hawaii Office of Elections

• Court: Hawaii Supreme Court
• Decided: January 25, 2012
• Docket: SCPW-11-0001030
• Status: Published

Opinion

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-11-0001030 25-JAN-2012 01:49 PM

NO. SCPW-11-0001030

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I

KEITH RUSSELL JUDD, Petitioner,

vs.

STATE OF HAWAI'I OFFICE OF ELECTIONS, Respondent.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ORDER

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy, and McKenna, JJ.)

Upon consideration of petitioner Keith Russell Judd's

petition for a writ of mandamus, it appears that petitioner fails

to demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to relief.

Therefore, petitioner is not entitled to mandamus relief. See

HRS § 602-5(3) (2010) (“The supreme court shall have jurisdiction

and power . . . [t]o exercise original jurisdiction in all

questions . . . arising under writs of mandamus directed to

public officers to compel them to fulfill the duties of their

offices[.]”); In re Disciplinary Bd. of Hawaii 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 petition for writ of mandamus without

payment of the filing fee.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petition for a writ of

mandamus is denied.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, January 25, 2012.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr.

/s/ James E. Duffy, Jr.

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna