Marks v. Morikawa

• Court: Hawaii Supreme Court
• Decided: February 9, 2023
• Docket: SCPW-23-0000061
• Status: Published

Opinion

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX 09-FEB-2023 09:39 AM Dkt. 5 ODDP

SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

DONALD B. MARKS, Petitioner,

vs.

THE HONORABLE TRISH K. MORIKAWA, Judge of the Circuit Court of the First Circuit, State of Hawai#i, Respondent.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (CASE NO. 1CPN-XX-XXXXXXX)

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.)

Upon consideration of Donald B. Marks’s petition for a

writ of mandamus, filed on February 6, 2023, the documents

attached thereto and submitted in support thereof, and the record

in Donald B. Marks v. State of Hawai#i, 1CPN-XX-XXXXXXX, we

conclude that Petitioner Marks has failed to demonstrate that he

has a clear and indisputable right to relief, insofar as we

conclude it cannot be said that the respondent judge has

committed a flagrant and manifest abuse of discretion or has

refused to act on a matter in presiding over the case. See Kema

v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai#i 200, 204-05, 982 P.2d 334, 338-39 (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). Accordingly,

It is ordered that the petition for writ of mandamus is

denied.

It is further ordered that, in light of the

Petitioner’s incarceration, the clerk of the court shall serve

upon the respondent judge a copy of the petition and this instant

order, in compliance with Rule 21(a) of the Hawai#i Rules of

Appellate Procedure.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, February 9, 2023.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

/s/ Todd W. Eddins