Case Title: State v. Town

Citation: 

Docket Number: 29186

State: hawaii

Court: Hawaii Supreme Court

Date: 2008-06-13T00:00:00Z

Document:
no. 29186

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAT'T

 

» : zi
STATE OF HAMA'T, Petitioner, Bl
fe

vs. es y

THE HONORABLE MICHAEL A. TOWN, JUDGE OF THE/E = =

crncur? couRT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT, STATE OF ERM, BOT

‘and ERNIE GOMEZ, Respondents.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(one NO. Oacin1i36)
(ay: Moon, C.J. Levinson, Nakayama, Acoba, and Duffy, 39.)
Upon consideration of the petition for writ of

andamas filed by petitioner State of Havas's and the papers in
support, it appears that the respondent judge had the inherent
poser to stay execution of the mittimus pending the disposition
of the application for pardon and the stay of execution was not @
flagrant and manifest abuse of discretion. See Havas't
Constitution, article VI, section 1; HRS § 603-21.9(6) (1993).
Therefore, petitioner is not entitled to mandanus relief. see
state ex rel. Marsland v. Anes, 71 Haw. 304, 306-07, 786 P.2d
1281, 1283 (1990) (the extraordinary writ of mandamus is
appropriate to confine an inferior tribunal to the lawful
exercise of its proper jurisdiction. Where the trial judge has
discretion to act, mandamus ill not Iie to interfere with or
control the exercise of that discretion, even where the judge has
acted erroneously, unless the judge has exceeded his or her

jurisdiction, has committed 2 flagrant and manifest abuse of
6

 

retion or has refused to act on a subject properly before the
court where it was under a legal duty to act.). Accordingly,

IT 18 HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of
mandamus is denied.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, June 13, 2008.

Fp
Me Erte
Reuter Oreo

Pree

Gone betty