In re Basham

Full title: IN RE BILLY J. BASHAM

Court: Court of Appeals of Texas, Thirteenth District, Corpus Christi — Edinburg

Date published: Nov 13, 2008

No. 13-08-00629-CV (Tex. App. Nov. 13, 2008)

Opinion

No. 13-08-00629-CV

Opinion delivered and filed November 13, 2008.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

Before Justices RODRIGUEZ, GARZA, and VELA.

MEMORANDUM OPINION¹

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(d) ("When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not required to do so."); Tex. R. App. P. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions).

PER CURIAM.

Relator, Billy J. Basham, filed a petition for writ of mandamus on August 11, 2008, seeking relief from an order directing the withdrawal of funds from relator's inmate trust account.² The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus, is of the opinion that relator has not shown himself entitled to the relief sought. Mandamus relief is proper only to correct a clear abuse of discretion when there is no adequate remedy by appeal. See In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135-36 (Tex. 2004); Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 839 (Tex. 1992). The relator has the burden of establishing both prerequisites to mandamus relief. In re CSX Corp., 124 S.W.3d 149, 151 (Tex. 2003) (orig. proceeding). This burden is a heavy one. See In re Epic Holdings, Inc., 985 S.W.2d 41 (Tex. 1998)

2 This cause was originally docketed in this Court as a criminal matter. See In re Basham, No. 13-08-00478-CR, 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS ___, at *1 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi Nov. __, 2008, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op.).

In the instant case, relator has failed to meet this burden. The petition for writ of mandamus and accompanying documents do not establish a clear abuse of discretion by the trial court. See generally Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(h), 52.3(k), 52.7. Moreover, relator has not demonstrated that he lacks an adequate remedy by appeal. See In re Johnson, No. AP-75,898, slip. op. ¶ 22 (Tex.Crim.App. Oct. 29, 2008) (orig. proceeding), available at http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/HTMLOPINIONINFO.ASP?OPINIONID=1 7534; Reed v. State, No. 04-07-00004-CV, 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS 5085, at *20 (Tex.App.-San Antonio July 9, 2008, no pet.) (op.); Abdullah v. State, 211 S.W.3d 938, 940-41 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2007, no pet.).

Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).