Bagnas v. Department of Public Safety

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-16-0000874 21-FEB-2017 09:17 AM SCPW-16-0000874 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I KEONIKALEI BAGNAS, Petitioner, vs. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, Respondent. ORIGINAL PROCEEDING ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.) Upon consideration of petitioner Keonikalei Bagnas’s October 2, 2016 letter, which was filed as a petition for writ of mandamus on December 20, 2016, the supplemental submissions, and the record, it appears that petitioner fails to demonstrate that he is being denied adequate medical treatment or that prison officials are acting with deliberate indifference to a serious medical condition. See Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104 (1976). Petitioner, therefore, is not entitled to the requested 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); Barnett v. Broderick, 84 Hawai#i 109, 111, 929 P.2d 1359, 1361 (1996 (mandamus relief is available to compel an official to perform a duty allegedly owed to an individual only if the individual’s claim is clear and certain, the official’s duty is ministerial and so plainly prescribed as to be free from doubt, and no other remedy is available). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the clerk of the appellate court shall process the petition for writ of mandamus without payment of the filing fee. IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, February 21, 2017. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Michael D. Wilson 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.