Office of the Public Defender v. Cahill

Electronically Filed
Supreme Court
SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX
07-OCT-2019
02:45 PM
SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
_________________________________________________________________
OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER, STATE OF HAWAI#I, Petitioner,
vs.
THE HONORABLE PETER T. CAHILL, Circuit Court Judge of the Second
Circuit, State of Hawai#i, Respondent Judge,
and
STATE OF HAWAI#I and WILLIAM ANDERSON-LANGLEY, Respondents.
_________________________________________________________________
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(CASE NO. 2CPC-XX-XXXXXXX(2))
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)
Upon consideration of petitioner Office of the Public
Defender’s petition for writ of mandamus, filed on October 3,
2019, the documents attached thereto and submitted in support
thereof, and the record, it appears that, based on the
information submitted to the court, petitioner fails to
demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to the requested
relief. See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai#i 200, 204-05, 982 P.2d
334, 338-39 (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; where a court has discretion to act, mandamus will not
lie to interfere with or control the exercise of that discretion,
even when the judge has acted erroneously, unless the judge has
exceeded his or her jurisdiction, has committed a flagrant and
manifest abuse of discretion, or has refused to act on a subject
properly before the court under circumstances in which he or she
has a legal duty to act). Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for writ of
mandamus is denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, October 7, 2019.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Richard W. Pollack
/s/ Michael D. Wilson
2