Opinion
No. 04-03-00576-CV.
Delivered and Filed: August 29, 2003.
This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 1997-EM5-00002, styled Attorney General of Texas v. Michael Ford IV, pending in the 45th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable John J. Specia, Jr. presiding.
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED.
Sitting: Catherine STONE, Justice, Karen ANGELINI, Justice, Phylis J. SPEEDLIN, Justice.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On July 31, 2003, relator, Michael Ford IV, filed a petition for writ of mandamus seeking relief from the trial court's failure to rule on his Motion to Dismiss Warrant and Modify Judgment. Ford asserts that he filed the motion with the district clerk's office on April 21, 2003, and sent a reminder on June 9, 2003. Ford further asserts that he filed the motion in response to rulings made by the trial court in 2001, which included the issuance of a capias, the entry of a default judgment, and the placement of a detainer.
Rule 329b governs the time for filing a motion for new trial and motions to modify, correct, or reform a judgment. See Tex.R.Civ.P. 329b. In order to be timely filed, such a motion must be filed within thirty days after the judgment or other order complained of is signed. See Tex.R.Civ.P. 329b(a). Absent a timely filed motion, the trial court only has plenary power to grant a new trial or to vacate, modify, correct, or reform its judgment within thirty days after the judgment or order is signed. See Tex.R.Civ.P. 329b(d).
In this case, Ford complains that the trial court has not taken action regarding his motion challenging the trial court's orders, but Ford's motion was not filed until over a year after the date Ford asserts that the orders were signed. The trial court's plenary power to consider Ford's motion has expired, and any order entered regarding the motion would be void. In re Dickason, 987 S.W.2d 570, 571 (Tex. 1998). Accordingly, the court has determined that Ford is not entitled to the relief sought, and Ford's petition for writ of mandamus is denied.