Opinion
No. 10-18-00023-CR
01-31-2018
IN RE AUGUSTINE CANTU JIMENEZ
Original Proceeding
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Augustine Cantu Jimenez filed a petition for writ of mandamus alleging that the trial court had not ruled on Jimenez's motion for DNA testing pursuant to Article 64.02 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 64.02 (West 2006). The Court noticed that the petition had not been served on the trial court as required, see TEX. R. APP. P. 9.5; 52.2; but before the Court could notify Jimenez of that defect, and without a request for a response by the Court, the State answered Jimenez's allegations. The State asserted in its answer that it interviewed the trial court judge and a deputy district clerk and discovered that no such motion for DNA testing was filed in Jimenez's appeal or seen by the trial court judge.
We commend the State, specifically Assistant District Attorney Gabriel Price, for promptly, and without awaiting an order from the Court, evaluating Jimenez's petition and filing a response with the Court. This prompt action saves the Court valuable time and resources. Although we would prefer the statements made by the State and the deputy clerk in the State's response to be sworn, we accept them as statements by an officer of the court.
Accordingly, Jimenez's petition for writ of mandamus is denied.
TOM GRAY
Chief Justice Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Scoggins
Petition denied
Opinion delivered and filed January 31, 2018
[OT06]