## NO S
. 12

- 23

- 00043

- CR 12

- 2 3

- 00044

- CR 12

- 23

- 00045

- CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS D ISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS

IN RE: RAYMOND LEE BURNS , JR. , RELATOR § § § ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM Raymond Lee Bur ns, Jr. , acting pro se, filed this original proceeding on February 6, 2023

. 1 That same day , the Clerk of this Court inf ormed Relator t hat his petition fails to comp ly with appellate R ules 52.3 (b) , (d), ( g ) , and ( h )

- (k) and 52.7. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 5 2.3 ( form and contents of petition ); T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.7 (record ). The notice warned that the petition wo uld be refer red to this Court for dismissal unless Relator provi ded a n amended petition and the record on or before February 16

. This deadline expir ed wi thout a response from R elator

. 2 Gen erally, a party seeking mandamus relief mu st bring forward all that is necessar y to

e stablish his claim fo r mandamus relief. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 52. Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.7 requires the relator to file a record as part of his petition in an original proceeding. T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 52.7

. Specifically, a relator must file (1) a certified or sworn copy of every docu ment that is material to his claim for relief and that was filed in any underlying proceeding; and (2) “a proper ly au the nticated tran script of any relev ant testimony from any

1 Respondent is the Honorabl e Edwin A. Kle in, Judge of the 420th District Court in Nac ogdoches Co unty, Texas. The State of Texas is the Real Party in Interest.

2 We also note that R elator ’s petition is not entirely clear as to the relief he seeks.2 underlying proceeding, including any exhibits offered in evidence, or a stat ement that no testimony was adduced in connection with the matter complained.” T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 52.7 (a)

. It is a relator ’ s burden to provide this court with a record sufficient to establish the r ight to extraordinary relief. See In re Daisy , No. 12

- 13

- 00266

- CR, 2014 WL 55770 68, a t *2 (Tex. App.

– Tyler Aug. 29, 2014 , orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication)

. In this case, Relator did not p r ovid e a record in accordance with Rule 52.7 . Absent a record, we cannot determine whet her R elator is entitled to relief. 3 See In re McCreary , No. 12

- 15

- 00067

- CR, 2015 WL 1395783 (Tex. App.

– T yle r Mar. 25, 2015, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op., not designated for publication)

. According ly, we deny Rela to r ’ s petition for writ of ma ndamus

. Opinion delivered February 28, 2023. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

(DO NOT PUBLISH)

3 Pro se l itigants are held to the same standards as licensed attorneys and must comply with all applicable rules of procedur e; otherw ise, pro se litigants would benefit from an unfair advantage over parties represented by counsel. I n re Guer r ero , No. 12

- 21

- 00100

- CR , 20 21 WL 3412558 , at * 1 n.3 (Tex. App.

— Tyler Aug. 4, 2021 , no pet.) (mem. op. , no t designa ted f or publication )

.3 

## COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS
J UDGM ENT

FEBRUARY 2 8 , 2023
NO. 12

- 23

- 00043

- CR

RAYMOND LEE BURNS JR. , Relator V.
HON. ED W I N A. KL E I N , Respondent

O RIGINAL P ROCEE DING
ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed by Raymond Lee Burns Jr. ; who is the relator in app ella te cause number 12

- 23

- 00043

- CR and the defendant in trial court cause number F10,17399 , formerly pending on the docket o f the 420th Judicial District Court of Nacogdoches County , Texas. Said petition for writ of mandamus having been filed herein on Fe brua ry 6, 2023 , and the same having been duly c onsidered, because it is the opinion of this Court that the writ should not i ssue , it is therefore CONSIDERED, ADJUDGED and ORDERED that the said petition for writ of mandamus be, and the same is, hereby denie d

. B y per curiam opinio n. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.4 

## COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH COURT OF APP EALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS
JUDGMENT

FEBRUARY 2 8 , 2023
NO. 12

- 23

- 0004 4

- CR

RAYMOND LEE BURNS JR. , Relator V.
HON. ED W I N A. KL E I N , Respon dent

O RIGINAL P ROCEEDING
ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed by Raymond Lee Burns Jr. ; w ho is the relator in appellate cause number 12

- 23

- 0004 4

- CR and the defendant in trial court cause number F10,17 40 0 , formerly pending on the docket of the 420th Judicial District Court of Nacogdoches County , Texas. Said petition for writ of mandamus having been filed herein on February 6, 2023 , and the same having been duly c onsidered, because it is the opinion of this Court that the w rit should not issue , it is therefore CONSIDERED, ADJUDGED and ORDERED that the said petition for writ of mandamus be, and t he sa me is, hereby denied

. By per curiam opinio n. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.5 

## COURT OF APPEALS
TW ELFT H COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS
JUDGMENT

FEBRUARY 2 8 , 2023
NO. 12

- 23

- 0004 5

- CR

RAYMOND LEE BURNS JR. , Relator V.
H ON. E D W I N A. KL E I N , Respondent

O RIGINAL P ROCEEDING
ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed by Raymon d Le e Burns Jr. ; who is the relator in appellate cause number 12

- 23

- 0004 5

- CR and the defendant in trial court cause number F 10,17 40 1 , formerly pending on the docket of the 420th Judicial District Court of Nacogdoches County , Texas. Said petition for writ of m andamus having been filed herein on February 6, 2023 , and the same having been duly c onsidered, because it is the opinio n of this Court that the writ should not issue , it is therefore CONSIDERED, ADJUDGED and ORDERED that the said petition for writ of mand amus be, and the same is, hereby denied

. By per curiam opinio n. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.