Opinion
NO. 09-12-00361-CR
09-12-2012
IN RE JOHN HENRY BOYKIN
Original Proceeding
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator John Henry Boykin filed a petition for writ of mandamus, in which he asks this Court to compel the trial court to rule on his motion for new trial. Boykin alleges that he mailed the motion for new trial on March 28, 2012, and that the trial court has failed to rule on his motion.
To demonstrate entitlement to a writ of mandamus in a criminal case, a relator must establish that (1) the trial court failed to perform a purely ministerial duty, and (2) relator has no other adequate legal remedy. State ex rel. Hill v. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Dist., 34 S.W.3d 924, 927 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001). A trial court has no duty to rule on a motion for new trial. See Tex. R. App. P. 21.8(a), (c) (A motion for new trial that is not ruled on by written order within seventy-five days after imposing or suspending sentence in open court is deemed denied upon the expiration of the seventy-five-day period.). Boykin has not shown that the trial court failed to perform a ministerial duty. Accordingly, Boykin has not demonstrated that he is entitled to mandamus relief. See id.; see also State ex rel. Hill, 34 S.W.3d at 927. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus.
PETITION DENIED.
PER CURIAM Do Not Publish
Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.