Electronically Filed
Supreme Court
SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX
16-NOV-2020
01:50 PM
Dkt. 16 ODDP
SCPW-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
ROLAND I. KEHANO, SR., Petitioner,
vs.
CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT, STATE OF HAWAI#I;
and HAWAI#I PAROLING AUTHORITY, STATE OF HAWAI#I, Respondents.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX; CASE NO. 2PR191000002; CR. NO. 92-0560)
ORDER DENYING PETITION AND MOTIONS
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, and Wilson, JJ.,
and Circuit Judge Morikawa, assigned by reason of vacancy)
On October 15, 2020, the appellate clerk’s office
received a 153-page document from petitioner Roland I. Kehano,
Sr. in which he asks this court to reverse his conviction of
murder in the second degree. The document was filed as a
petition. In addition, on November 2, 2020 and November 4, 2020,
respectively, petitioner filed motions seeking the identical
relief. Upon consideration of the petition and the record, it
appears that to the extent petitioner is seeking a writ of
mandamus, he fails to demonstrate that he has a clear and
indisputable right to the requested relief and is currently
seeking relief in S.P.P. No. 19-0002 and CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX. In
addition, to the extent petitioner is seeking a writ of habeas
corpus, there is no special reason for this court to invoke its
jurisdiction in this matter. Petitioner, therefore, is not
entitled to the requested extraordinary writ from this court.
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);
Oili v. Chang, 54 Haw. 411, 412, 557 P.2d 787, 788 (1976) (“[The
supreme] court will not exercise its original jurisdiction in
habeas corpus proceedings when relief is available in a lower
court and no special reason exists for invoking its
jurisdiction.”). Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition and motions are
denied.
IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the clerk of the
appellate court shall process the petition without payment of the
filing fee.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, November 16, 2020.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Michael D. Wilson
/s/ Trish K. Morikawa
2
Kehano v. State
Combined Opinion