From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Hinojosa

COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
Feb 20, 2018
NUMBER 13-18-00094-CR (Tex. App. Feb. 20, 2018)

Opinion

NUMBER 13-18-00094-CR

02-20-2018

IN RE STATE OF TEXAS EX REL. ANNETTE C. HINOJOSA


On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Contreras and Benavides
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

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).

Relator, the State of Texas ex rel. Annette C. Hinojosa, filed a petition for writ of mandamus in the above cause on February 16, 2018 through which it seeks to compel the trial court to grant a continuance pursuant to article 29.04 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 29.04 (West, Westlaw through 2017 1st C.S.). In this case, the trial court denied the State's motion for continuance on February 8, 2018 and the State filed a motion for reconsideration on February 13, 2018, the same day that voir dire began in the underlying capital murder case. According to the petition, the trial court has not ruled on the State's motion for reconsideration, and trial is currently in progress.

To be entitled to mandamus relief, the relator must establish both that it has no adequate remedy at law to redress his alleged harm, and that what it seeks to compel is a purely ministerial act not involving a discretionary or judicial decision. In re Harris, 491 S.W.3d 332, 334 (Tex. Crim. App. 2016) (orig. proceeding); In re McCann, 422 S.W.3d 701, 704 (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 Apps. at Texarkana, 236 S.W.3d 207, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007).

The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus and the applicable law, is of the opinion that the relator has not met its burden to obtain mandamus relief. See State ex rel. Young, 236 S.W.3d at 210. Accordingly, relator's petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).

PER CURIAM Do not publish.
TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Delivered and filed this the 20th day of February, 2018.


Summaries of

In re Hinojosa

COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
Feb 20, 2018
NUMBER 13-18-00094-CR (Tex. App. Feb. 20, 2018)
Case details for

In re Hinojosa

Case Details

Full title:IN RE STATE OF TEXAS EX REL. ANNETTE C. HINOJOSA

Court:COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

Date published: Feb 20, 2018

Citations

NUMBER 13-18-00094-CR (Tex. App. Feb. 20, 2018)