Opinion
SCPW-18-0000042
02-05-2018
VICTORIA I. SATOAFAIGA, Petitioner, v. THE HONORABLE RHONDA I. L. LOO, Judge of the Circuit Court of the Second Circuit, State of Hawai'i, Respondent Judge, and STATE OF HAWAI'I, Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(Cr. No. 2CPC-17-0000969) ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
()
Upon consideration of petitioner Victoria I. Satoafaiga's petition for writ of mandamus, filed on January 22, 2018, the documents attached thereto and submitted in support thereof, and the record, it appears that petitioner fails to demonstrate that she has a clear and indisputable right to the requested relief, that she lacks alternative means to seek relief or that the respondent judge committed a flagrant and manifest abuse of discretion in conducting the arraignment and scheduling the bail review hearing. See HRPP Rules 10(e) and 43(e). Based on the specific circumstances of this matter, petitioner is not entitled to the requested extraordinary writ. 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; such writs are not intended to supersede the legal discretionary authority of the lower courts; 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, February 5, 2018.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Richard W. Pollack
/s/ Michael D. Wilson