LAW L!BRARY NO. 30638 lN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAlT vii `¥", TP!

JOHN KALUATJ lIl, PetitiOner,

VS. c:RcU:T CoURT oF THE TH1RD c:RcUIT, sTATE or HAwA:T, ReSp@ndent.

Q, .P ORIGlNAL PROCEEDlNG j J§, (FC-CR NOS. 09-1-l93K, 09-1-l94K, 09-1-l95K} ORDER (By: Moon, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy, and Recktenwald, JJ.)

Upon consideration of John KaluaU1 I11's July 21, 2010 letter to the Chief Justice, which we treat as a petition for a writ of mandamus, it appears that petitioner is not entitled to mandamus relief. ee HRS § 602-5(3) (Supp. 2009) ("The supreme court shall have jurisdiction and power to exercise original jurisdiction in all questions arising under writs directed to courts of inferior jurisdiction and returnable before the supreme court."); Kema v. Gaddis, 91 HawaiH.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, 1T 18 HEREBY ORDERED that the clerk of the appellate court shall process the July 21, 2010 letter as a petition for a writ of mandamus without payment of the filing fee.

IT 13 FURTHER ORDERED that the petition for a writ of mandamus is denied.

DATED: Honolulu, HawaiUq AuguSt 2, 2010_ team/car £¢.‘~1\21»*<£¢¢/[ LUY\@~ @..~= e. »Q~»M~¢» 9~- mwv\ $".