In re Howard

Full title: IN RE GLEN D. HOWARD, Relator

Court: Court of Appeals of Texas, First District, Houston

Date published: Jul 8, 2011

No. 01-11-00457-CR (Tex. App. Jul. 8, 2011)

Opinion

No. 01-11-00457-CR

Opinion issued July 8, 2011. DO NOT PUBLISH. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

Panel consists of Chief Justice RADACK and Justices SHARP and BROWN.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

HARVEY BROWN, Justice.

Relator Glen D. Howard has filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus, complaining that the trial court refuses to rule on his motion for a speedy trial of the underlying case.¹ We deny relator's petition for writ of mandamus.

1 Relator asserts that he has been charged with the misdemeanor offense of driving while intoxicated in State v. Howard, No. 113719, in the 23rd District Court of Brazoria County, Texas, the Honorable Ben Hardin presiding. But, we cannot locate any such charge pending against relator under that cause number and in that court. We note, however, that relator was charged with the misdemeanor offense of driving while intoxicated in State v. Howard, No. 113749, in the County Court at Law No. 1 of Brazoria County, Texas, the Honorable Jerri Lee Mills presiding. The Brazoria County District Clerk has confirmed that cause number 113749 was dismissed.

JIM SHARP, Justice.

CONCURRING OPINION

I concur in the denial of the writ of mandamus in this case, but write to set forth the analysis as to why denial is appropriate. Relator's petition for writ of mandamus is procedurally defective. Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.5 requires that a copy of all documents presented to the Court be served on all parties to the proceeding. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.5(a). Relator has not served his petition on the trial judge who is the respondent in this mandamus proceeding. Relator has also failed to provide the Court with a copy of the motion for speedy trial which is the basis for his petition, but the rules require him to do so. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a)(1) ("Relator must file with the petition: (1) a certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to the relator's claim for relief and that was filed in the underlying proceeding."). For these reasons, I join the majority in denying relator's petition for writ of mandamus.