Moore v. Futa

• Court: Hawaii Supreme Court
• Decided: May 22, 2019
• Docket: SCPW-19-0000377
• Status: Published

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