NO. 29829
IN THE
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI‘I
MICHAEL C.
TIERNEY, Petitioner,
vs.
CLAYTON
FRANK, DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
SAFETY, STATE
OF HAWAI‘I and PETER CARLISLE, PROSECUTING
ATTORNEY,
CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, Respondents.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
ORDER
(By: Moon,
C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy, and Recktenwald, JJ.)
Upon consideration of the petition for a writ of mandamus filed by
petitioner Michael C. Tierney and the papers in support, 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)
(Supp. 2008) (The supreme court has jurisdiction and power to issue
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 a 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, June 12, 2009.