Opinion
No. 07-17-00355-CV
10-11-2017
IN RE QURRAN THOMAS, RELATOR
OPINION ON ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PARKER, JJ.
As a pro se litigant, Qurran Thomas (relator) filed a letter with this court asking that we direct the trial court to order his counsel to "give [him] a copy of [his] Motion of Discovery and Toxicology Report." Liberally interpreting the letter to be a request for a petition for writ of mandamus against the Honorable Kregg Hukill, 242nd Judicial District Court, Hale County, Texas, see Delgado v. Combs, No. 07-11-00273-CV, 2012 Tex. App. LEXIS 8610, at *5 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Oct. 15, 2012, no pet.) (mem. op.) (stating that pro se pleadings and briefs are to be liberally construed), we deny the petition for the following reasons.
First, the petition does not contain a clear and concise argument supporting the contentions made with appropriate citation to legal authorities. This was required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.3(h). And, while relator may be acting pro se, he is not excused from complying with the applicable rules of procedure. Id. accord In re Johnson, No. 07-15-00280-CV, 2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 8217, at *2 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Aug. 5, 2015, orig. proceeding) (mem. op)(stating the same).
Second, and assuming arguendo that relator's request was brought to the trial court's attention, we do not have the authority to direct a trial court to rule in a particular way via a writ of mandamus. In re Toombs, No. 07-17-00154-CV, 2017 Tex. App. LEXIS 6535, at *2 (Tex. App.—Amarillo July 14, 2017, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.). So, the relief sought by relator is beyond our power.
Accordingly, we deny the petition for mandamus.
Brian Quinn
Chief Justice