Case Title: Marks v. State

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: hawaii

Court: Hawaii Supreme Court

Date: 2009-10-30T00:00:00Z

Document:
RONALD. YAMOON

No. 30101

y

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAT'ELS

«bby
t
Au oad

DONALD B. MARKS, Petitioner, th gs
iS
vs. qos

STATE OF HAWAI'I, Respondent. 4 2

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

2

ORDER
(By: Moon, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy, and Recktenwald, JJ.)

Upon consideration of Donald 8. Marks‘ “application for
federal writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241,” which we
treat as a petition for a writ of mandamus, it appears that
petitioner fails to demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to
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.). ‘Therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the clerk of the appellate
court shall process petitioner's papers as a 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.

DATE!

 

: Honolulu, Hawai'i, october 30, 2009.

Gor

Receeun le Teale ne

Yount Roddy de
Ms & Me lin

oad