NO. 29822
IN
THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF
ROLAND I. KEHANO, SR., Petitioner,
vs.
THE HONORABLE SHACKLEY F. RAFFETTO and THE HONORABLE
RICHARD T. BISSEN, JR., JUDGES OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF
THE SECOND CIRCUIT,
STATE OF
PAUL J. CUNNEY; and MARK BENNETT, ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE
OF HAWAI‘I, Respondents.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
ORDER
(By: Moon, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy, and Recktenwald, JJ.)
Upon consideration of the papers submitted by Roland I. Kehano, which is deemed a petition for a writ of mandamus, it appears that petitioner fails to demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to relief. 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.). Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the clerk of the appellate court shall process the petition for a writ of mandamus without payment of the filing fee.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petition for a writ of mandamus is denied and the request for compensatory and punitive damages is denied.
DATED: