Kehano v. State ( 2020 )


Menu:
  •                                                       Electronically Filed
    Supreme Court
    SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX
    16-NOV-2020
    01:50 PM
    Dkt. 16 ODDP
    SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX
    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
    ROLAND I. KEHANO, SR., Petitioner,
    vs.
    CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT, STATE OF HAWAI#I;
    and HAWAI#I PAROLING AUTHORITY, STATE OF HAWAI#I, Respondents.
    ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
    (CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX; CASE NO. 2PR191000002; CR. NO. 92-0560)
    ORDER DENYING PETITION AND MOTIONS
    (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, and Wilson, JJ.,
    and Circuit Judge Morikawa, assigned by reason of vacancy)
    On October 15, 2020, the appellate clerk’s office
    received a 153-page document from petitioner Roland I. Kehano,
    Sr. in which he asks this court to reverse his conviction of
    murder in the second degree.    The document was filed as a
    petition.   In addition, on November 2, 2020 and November 4, 2020,
    respectively, petitioner filed motions seeking the identical
    relief.   Upon consideration of the petition and the record, it
    appears that to the extent petitioner is seeking a writ of
    mandamus, he fails to demonstrate that he has a clear and
    indisputable right to the requested relief and is currently
    seeking relief in S.P.P. No. 19-0002 and CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX.       In
    addition, to the extent petitioner is seeking a writ of habeas
    corpus, there is no special reason for this court to invoke its
    jurisdiction in this matter.   Petitioner, therefore, is not
    entitled to the requested extraordinary writ from this court.
    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);
    Oili v. Chang, 
    54 Haw. 411
    , 412, 
    557 P.2d 787
    , 788 (1976) (“[The
    supreme] court will not exercise its original jurisdiction in
    habeas corpus proceedings when relief is available in a lower
    court and no special reason exists for invoking its
    jurisdiction.”).   Accordingly,
    IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition and motions are
    denied.
    IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the clerk of the
    appellate court shall process the petition without payment of the
    filing fee.
    DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, November 16, 2020.
    /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
    /s/ Paula A. Nakayama
    /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
    /s/ Michael D. Wilson
    /s/ Trish K. Morikawa
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: SCPW-20-0000615

Filed Date: 11/16/2020

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 11/17/2020