See Madding, 70 S.W.3d at 135 n.8; In re Melton, 478 S.W.3d 153, 156-57 (Tex. App.- Texarkana 2015, orig. proceeding) (explaining proper use of judgment nunc pro tunc).
In keeping with these principles, examples of ministerial acts include vacating an order, forwarding a notice of appeal, issuing process under the direction of a judge, issuing or executing capias after mandate has issued, and considering a motion that is properly filed and before the court. See, e.g., State ex rel. Hill v. Ct. of Apps. for Fifth Dist., 34 S.W.3d 924, 927 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001); State ex rel. Curry v. Gray, 726 S.W.2d 125, 128 (Tex. Crim. App. 1987) (op. on reh'g); In re Melton, 478 S.W.3d 153, 157 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2015, orig. proceeding). The mere existence of a remedy at law does not prevent mandamus from issuing.
"[N]unc pro tunc orders may be used only to correct clerical errors in which no judicial reasoning contributed to their entry." In re Melton, 478 S.W.3d 153, 156 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2015, orig. proceeding) (quoting State v. Bates, 889 S.W.2d 306, 309 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994)). The incorrect recitation of the degree of the offense in a judgment is a clerical error.
On August 7, 2015, Melton sought mandamus relief asking this Court to compel the trial court to vacate its January 2003 nunc pro tunc judgments of conviction. See In re Melton, 478 S.W.3d 153, 154 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2015, orig. proceeding). We conditionally granted Melton's petition for writ of mandamus and directed the trial court to vacate the nunc pro tunc judgments of conviction entered on January 8, 2003.
Because we conclude that the trial court lacked authority to issue orders or directives after signing the transfer order, all orders and directives issued after he signed the April 11, 2017 transfer order are void and should be vacated. See In re Melton, 478 S.W.3d 153, 157 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2015, no pet.) (conditionally granting writ and directing trial court to vacate void nunc pro tunc judgments); In re Gibbs, 2015 WL 400468, at *3 (conditionally granting writ, directing the court to set aside void order, and directing the court to transfer the physical file in this case to the transferee court). Accordingly, we conditionally grant the petition for writ of mandamus and lift our May 16, 2017 stay order.
On August 7, 2015, Melton sought mandamus relief asking this Court to compel the trial court to vacate its January 2003 nunc pro tunc judgments of conviction. See In re Melton, 478 S.W.3d 153, 154 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2015, orig. proceeding). We conditionally granted Melton's petition for writ of mandamus and directed the trial court to vacate the nunc pro tunc judgments of conviction entered on January 8, 2003.
After the trial court entered the nunc pro tunc judgments, Melton sought mandamus relief asking this Court to compel the trial court to vacate both judgments. See In re Melton, 478 S.W.3d 153, 154 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2015, orig. proceeding). We conditionally granted Melton's petition for a writ of mandamus and directed the trial court to vacate the nunc pro tunc judgments and to reinstate the original judgments and sentences.