Shimizu v. Ochiai

Full title: RIKA SHIMIZU, Petitioner, v. THE HONORABLE DEAN E. OCHIAI, Judge of the…

Court: SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I

Date published: Jul 15, 2021

SCPW-21-0000048 (Haw. Jul. 15, 2021)

Opinion

SCPW-21-0000048

07-15-2021

RIKA SHIMIZU, Petitioner, v. THE HONORABLE DEAN E. OCHIAI, Judge of the Circuit Court of the First Circuit, State of Hawai'i, Respondent Judge, and R.T., a minor, TOMOKO MATSUKAWA, his legal guardian, MINA TAKAMURA, his mother, TAKESHI NANBU, his father, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, HONOLULU POLICE DEPARTMENT HPD Detective, ARNOLD SAGUCIO, HPD Officer, MARC COBB-ADAMS, HPD Detective, SERGENT FLORAND BLANCO, Officers and employees from HONOLULU POLICE DEPARTMENT, officers and employees of U.S. MARSHALS TASK FORCE, Respondents.

By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(CIVIL NO. 1CCV-20-0000521) ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
()

Upon consideration of petitioner Rika Shimizu's petition for writ of mandamus, the documents attached thereto and submitted in support thereof, including the request for in forma pauperis status, and the record, petitioner fails to demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to relief and has alternative means to seek relief, including seeking relief on appeal from an appealable order or judgment as provided by law. Based on the record, it cannot be said that the respondent judge exceeded his jurisdiction, committed a flagrant and manifest abuse of discretion, or refused to act on a matter in presiding over the case. Petitioner, therefore, 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 a writ is meant to restrain a judge of an inferior court who 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.

IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that any request for in forma pauperis status or additional relief is dismissed.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, July 15, 2021.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

/s/ Todd W. Eddins