Electronically Filed
Supreme Court
SCPW-10-0000207
22-DEC-2010
01:17 PM
NO. SCPW-10-0000207
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
MICHAEL C. TIERNEY, Petitioner,
vs.
THE HONORABLE DERRICK H.M. CHAN, JUDGE OF THE CIRCUIT
COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT, STATE OF HAWAI#I, Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(CR. NOS. 88-2209 and 89-0024)
ORDER
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, and Duffy, JJ.
and Circuit Judge Trader, assigned by reason of vacancy)
Upon consideration of petitioner Michael C. Tierney's
petition for a writ of mandamus, it appears that forfeiture of
bail is not a proceeding for which petitioner is entitled to
appointment of counsel. Therefore, petitioner is not entitled to
mandamus relief. See HRS § 802-1 (1993); State v. Camara, 81
Hawai#i 324, 329 n.7, 916 P.2d 1225, 1330 n.7 (1996); 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.). Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the clerk of the appellate
court shall process the petition for a writ of mandamus without
payment of the filing fee.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petition for a writ of
mandamus is denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, December 22, 2010.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr.
/s/ James E. Duffy, Jr.
/s/ Rom A. Trader
2
Tierney v. Chan
Combined Opinion