DENIED and Opinion Filed May 10, 2023 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-23-00268-CV IN RE JAMES ATCH LEY, JR., Relator Original Proceeding from the Cr iminal District Court No. 5 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F20-55447-L MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Molberg, Goldstein, and Breedlove Opinion by Justice Goldstein In this original proceeding, James Atch ley, Jr. petitions the Court for a writ of mandamus to compel the trial court and/or its officers, administrators, or clerks to send a teletype to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Detainers Department releasing a Dallas County de tainer against hi m. Relator contends Dallas County should lift the detainer against him beca use Dallas County dismissed its charge against him after he was convicted and senten ced to ten years in prison for an offense in Ellis County. Relator claims the outdated detainer affects his eligibility for parole, prison employment, and educational opportunities. Mandamus is available only to correct a clear abuse of discretion or the violation of a duty imposed by law for wh ich there is no adequate legal remedy.–2– Walker v. Packer , 827 S.W.2d 833, 839 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). Relator bears the burden to provide the Court with a suffi cient record to establish his right to mandamus relief. Id . at 837. To meet his burden, relator must file a record or appendix to his petition that contains certified or sworn copies of all re levant orders and material documents that show the matter complained of or that were filed in the underlying proceeding. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 52.3(k)(1)(A), 52.7(a)(1). Relator must certify that he has reviewed the petition and concluded that all factual statements within it are supported by competent evidence in the appendix or record. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 52.3(j). Relator has not met his burden. Relator’s petition is not certified and his record is not properly authenticated and does not contain material documents necessary to support his claim. The record consists of unsworn, un certified copies of documents purporting to show that Dallas County di smissed its case against relator and a prison official has refused to upgrade relato r’s opportunities while the deta iner is in place. Relator presents no documents showing he has notifie d the trial court of the need to send the teletype to prison officials or that he has requested such a transmission. At best, he presents a cryptic statement in his uncertif ied petition alleging that he and his family “have constantly and continuously shown due diligence” in trying to get the detainer lifted. Without authenticated documents showing that relator has requested transmission of the teletype, and the tria l court has a duty to send it which it has–3– failed or refused to perform, relator cannot show the trial court has abused its discretion or that he lacks an adequate le gal remedy. Finally, we note that to the extent rela tor is requesting, or needs, mandamus relief against the district clerk, we do not have the power to issue a writ of mandamus directed at the district clerk unless it is necessary to enforce our jurisdiction. See T EX
. G OV ’ T C ODE § 22.221(a), (b); In re Shugart , 528 S.W.3d 794, 796 (Tex. App.— Texarkana 2017, orig. proceeding). Nothing in the mandamus record shows mandamus is required to enforce our jurisdiction. Without a properly certified petition su pported by a complete record of certified or sworn copies of material docum ents showing relator has tried to obtain the transmission of the teletype and that he needs it from the trial court rather than from the district clerk, relator cannot show he is entitled to mandamus relief. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 52.3(k)(1)(A), 52.7(a); In re Butler , 270 S.W.3d 757, 758–59 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, orig. proceeding); Shugart , 528 S.W.3d at 796. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 52.8(a).

230268F.P05 /Bonnie Lee Goldstein / BONNIE LEE GOLDSTEIN JUSTICE