Moore v. Futa

Opinion

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX

22-MAY-2019

10:49 AM

SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAII

DAVID L. MOORE, Petitioner, vs.

JANICE T. FUTA, DEPUTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, Respondent.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR EXTRAORDINARY WRIT (By: McKenna, Acting C.J., Pollack and Wilson, JJ., and Circuit Judge Eddins, in place of Recktenwald, C.J., recused, and Circuit Judge Nakasone, in place of Nakayama, J., recused)

Upon consideration of David L. Moore’s petition for an extraordinary writ, filed on May 7, 2019, we conclude, on the merits of the petition,1 that petitioner Moore fails to demonstrate that he has a clear and indisputable right to the requested relief or that he lacks alternative means to seek relief. Petitioner, therefore, is not entitled to the requested

1 This court reaches the merits of the petition because there is no statute, court rule, or statutorily prescribed order prohibiting Moore from filing the instant petition with this court.

extraordinary writ. 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). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition is denied.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii, May 22, 2019.

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Richard W. Pollack

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

/s/ Todd W. Eddins

/s/ Karen T. Nakasone