Opinion
No. 08-16-00125-CR
07-27-2016
IN RE THOMAS LEONARD, RELATOR.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator, Thomas Leonard, has filed a petition for writ of mandamus against the Honorable Maria Salas-Mendoza, Judge of the 120th District Court of El Paso County, Texas. Relator requests that we order Respondent to rule on a motion to declare his convictions void. The petition for writ of mandamus is denied.
Mandamus relief is appropriate only when a relator establishes (1) that he has no adequate remedy at law to redress his alleged harm, and (2) that what he seeks to compel is a ministerial act, not a discretionary or judicial decision. In re Allen, 462 S.W.3d 47, 49 (Tex.Crim.App. 2015). The ministerial-act component is satisfied when the relator shows that he has a clear right to the relief sought. Id. This showing is made when the facts and circumstances dictate but one rational decision under unequivocal, well-settled, and clearly controlling legal principles. In re Allen, 462 S.W.3d at 49. A ministerial act, by its nature, does not involve the use of judicial discretion. Id. As a general rule, a trial court has a ministerial duty to rule upon a properly filed and timely presented motion. Id.
Relator was convicted of aggravated assault in cause number 20110D02415, and an appeal from that case is currently pending before this Court. See Thomas Leonard v. State, Cause No. 08-14-00139-CR. Relator recently filed a motion in the trial court to have his convictions declared void because he was allegedly denied counsel during a critical stage. Respondent correctly declined to rule on any motions while the appeal is pending. Relator maintains that this issue may not be addressed by the Court during the direct appeal, but he cites no authority in support of that argument. Appellate courts frequently address this type of issue on direct appeal. See e.g., Cooks v. State, 240 S.W.3d 906, 910-12 (Tex.Crim.App. 2007); Habib v. State, 431 S.W.3d 737, 741 (Tex.App.--Amarillo 2014, pet. ref'd); Bearman v. State, 425 S.W.3d 328, 329-330 (Tex.App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 2010, no pet.). Relator also argues that appeal is not an adequate remedy because it is burdensome and slow. One reason this appeal has not proceeded more quickly is that Relator has requested and been given multiple extensions of time in which to file his brief, and he has recently filed yet another extension motion even after being informed that the Court would not consider any further extension requests.
Not all of the delay is attributable to the actions of Relator. The Court had difficulty in obtaining a complete reporter's record and this contributed to some of the delay. --------
Based on the record before us, we conclude that Relator has failed to establish that he is entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. July 27, 2016
YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ. (Do Not Publish)