Opinion
NO. SCPW-12-0000830
10-24-2012
MICHAEL C. TIERNEY, Petitioner, v. BERT Y. MATSUOKA, MICHAEL A. TOWN, JOYCE K. MATSUMORI-HOSHIJO OF THE HAWAI'I PAROLING AUTHORITY, Respondents.
Electronically Filed
Supreme Court
SCPW-12-0000830
24-OCT-2012
11:03 AM
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
(By: , C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ.)
Upon consideration of Michael C. Tierney's petition for a writ of mandamus, which was filed on October 2, 2012, the documents attached thereto and submitted in support thereof, and the record, it appears that petitioner fails to demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to be released from custody upon the expiration of his minimum sentence. See HRS §§ 353-68 (1993), 353-70 (1993) and 706-670 (1993). Petitioner, therefore, is not entitled to mandamus relief. 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); In re Disciplinary Bd. of Hawai'i 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); Salling v. Moon, 76 Hawai'i 273, 274 n.3, 874 P.2d 1098, 1099 n.3 (1994) ("A duty is ministerial where the law prescribes and defines the duty to be performed with such precision and certainty as to leave nothing to the exercise of discretion and judgment."). Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of mandamus is denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, October 24, 2012.
Mark E. Recktenwald
Simeon R. Acoba, Jr.
Paula A. Nakayama
Sabrina S. McKenna
Richard W. Pollack