Electronically Filed
Supreme Court
SCPW-12-0000699
23-AUG-2012
11:18 AM
NO. SCPW-12-0000699
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
EDMUND M. ABORDO, Petitioner,
vs.
THE HONORABLE KARL K. SAKAMOTO, JUDGE OF THE CIRCUIT
COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT, STATE OF HAWAI#I, Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(CIV. NO. 1CC09-1-1599; CR. NO. 93-0737)
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ.)
Upon consideration of petitioner Edmund M. Abordo’s
August 8, 2012 petition for a writ of mandamus, the papers in
support and the record, it appears that petitioner fails to
demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to relief and,
therefore, is not entitled to mandamus 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. Moreover,
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 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, August 23, 2012.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr.
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Richard W. Pollack
2