Opinion
NUMBER 13-15-00253-CR
06-04-2015
IN RE ERWIN BURLEY
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Longoria
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
Relator, Erwin Burley, proceeding pro se, filed a petition for writ of mandamus in the above cause on June 3, 2015, seeking to compel the trial court to rule on relator's petition for writ of habeas corpus. Relator alleges that his petition for writ of habeas corpus was received by the Nueces County Clerk on March 17, 2015, but the trial court has refused to issue a ruling thereon.
To be entitled to mandamus relief, the relator must show: (1) that he has no adequate remedy at law, and (2) that what he seeks to compel is a ministerial act. In re State ex rel. Weeks, 391 S.W.3d 117, 122 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (orig. proceeding). If the relator fails to meet both of these requirements, then the petition for writ of mandamus should be denied. State ex rel. Young v. Sixth Jud. Dist. Ct. of App. at Texarkana, 236 S.W.3d 207, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (orig. proceeding). It is relator's burden to properly request and show entitlement to mandamus relief. Barnes v. State, 832 S.W.2d 424, 426 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, orig. proceeding) ("Even a pro se applicant for a writ of mandamus must show himself entitled to the extraordinary relief he seeks."). In addition to other requirements, relator must include a statement of facts supported by citations to "competent evidence included in the appendix or record," and must also provide "a clear and concise argument for the contentions made, with appropriate citations to authorities and to the appendix or record." See generally TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3. In this regard, it is clear that relator must furnish an appendix or record sufficient to support the claim for mandamus relief. See id. R. 52.3(k) (specifying the required contents for the appendix); R. 52.7(a) (specifying the required contents for the record).
The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus and the applicable law, is of the opinion that relator has not met his burden to obtain mandamus relief. See State ex rel. Young, 236 S.W.3d at 210. For instance, relator has not provided an appendix or record in support of his claim for mandamus relief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k), 52.7(a). Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See id. R. 52.8(a).
PER CURIAM Do not publish.
TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Delivered and filed the 4th day of June, 2015.
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).