Opinion
NO. 14-20-00529-CV
08-06-2020
IN RE STEVEN MOODY, Relator
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS
11th District Court Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 2020-00034
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator Steven Moody petitioned for a writ of mandamus asking this court to compel the Honorable Kristen Brauchle Hawkins, presiding judge of the 11th District Court of Harris County, to set for hearing or trial his motion for expunction of records. See Tex. Gov't Code § 22.221; see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. He also filed a motion for leave to file the petition for writ of mandamus. According to the petition for mandamus relief, he filed his motion for expunction in late December 2019, the Harris County District Clerk confirmed the motion was filed, the motion was set for hearing in March 2020 but the trial court refused to conduct the hearing, and the trial court has refused to make findings of fact and conclusions of law despite his repeated requests.
The mandamus record does not contain a filed-stamped copy of the motion for expunction. Instead, the record contains a copy of a motion for expunction bearing a handwritten note that states, "Filed Copy 12/23/2019" and contains no file mark from the Harris County District Clerk. As the party seeking relief, relator has the burden of providing this court with a sufficient record to establish relator's right to mandamus relief. See Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992); Tex. R. App. P. 52.7(a)(1) (relator must file with petition "a certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to relator's claim for relief and that was filed in any underlying proceeding").
Further, relator has not shown that the motion for expunction has been presented to the trial court or how long the motion has been pending since presentment. Relator must show the motion was filed and presented to the trial court for a ruling. In re Gomez, 602 S.W.3d 71, 73-74 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2020, orig. proceeding). He has shown neither.
Finally, the petition for writ of mandamus does not include the required certification that relator has reviewed the petition and concluded that every factual statement in the petition is supported by competent evidence included in the appendix or record. Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(j); In re Foster, 503 S.W.3d 606, 607 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2016, orig. proceeding).
We deny relator's petition for writ of mandamus. This ruling renders moot relator's motion for leave to file a petition for writ of mandamus.
PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Zimmerer and Poissant.