NO. 12-23-00242-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

IN RE: 

CHRISTOPHER EDWARD PARKS, 

RELATOR

§

§

§

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

Christopher Edward Parks, acting pro se, filed this original proceeding to complain of 

Respondents Smith County District Clerk Penny Clarkston’s and court reporter Jennifer 

Lowrence failure to provide requested transcripts of the reporter’s record.1

However, neither a district clerk nor a court reporter is a judge over which this Court has 

mandamus jurisdiction.2 See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. 22.221(a), (b) (West Supp. 2020) (writ 

power); see also In re Mack, No. 10-17-00186-CR, 2017 WL 2819091, at *1 (Tex. App.—Waco 

June 28, 2017, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (dismissing for want 

of jurisdiction mandamus petition against clerk for failure to provide forms to assist in filing 

post-conviction relief); In re Eaton, No. 12–15–00118–CR, 2016 WL 6876502, at *1 (Tex. 

App.–Tyler, Nov. 22, 2016, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication) 

(appellate court lacked jurisdiction to consider merits of mandamus petition as to district clerk); 

In re Vargas, No. 01-12-00351-CV, 2012 WL 1454550, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 

1 The State of Texas is the Real Party in Interest.

2 The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has “power and authority to grant and issue and cause the issuance 

of writs of habeas corpus, and, in criminal law matters, the writs of mandamus, procedendo, prohibition, and 

certiorari.” TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 4.04 § 1 (West 2005); see In re Bonilla, 424 S.W.3d 528 (Tex. Crim. 

App. 2014) (reviewing petition for writ of mandamus against district clerk). Additionally, Relator was sentenced in 

2017 for the felony offense of evading arrest or detention with a vehicle. The appropriate method for collaterally 

attacking a final felony conviction is by a petition for writ of habeas corpus. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07 

(West Supp. 2022). 
2

Apr. 26, 2012, orig. proceeding) (mem. op) (per curiam) (dismissing mandamus proceeding 

against district clerk for want of jurisdiction because addressing complaint that clerk refused to 

file petition was not necessary to enforce appellate court jurisdiction), see also In re Olivarez,

Nos.13-23-00389-CR & 13-23-00390-CR, 2023 WL 5814414 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi Sept.

7, 2023, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (dismissing for want of 

jurisdiction mandamus petitions seeking writ against court reporter). Nor does the record 

demonstrate that issuance of a writ of mandamus against Respondents is necessary to protect this 

Court’s jurisdiction, i.e., we have jurisdiction to issue a writ against a district clerk for failure to 

forward a notice of appeal to this Court because such is necessary to enforce our jurisdiction.

See In re Talkington, No. 12-07-00272-CR, 2007 WL 2178551, at *1 (Tex. App.—Tyler July 

31, 2007, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication); see also Ex parte

Sanders, No. WR-80,356-01, 2013 WL 5872901, at *1 (Tex. Crim. App. Oct. 30, 2013) (order, 

not designated for publication) (per curiam); In re Foster, No. 14-16-00698-CR, 2016 WL 

5853282, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Oct. 6, 2016, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not 

designated for publication) (per curiam); In re Smith, 263 S.W.3d 93, 95 (Tex. App.—Houston 

[1st Dist.] 2006, orig. proceeding).

Because this Court lacks jurisdiction to grant mandamus relief under the circumstances of 

this case, we dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus for want of jurisdiction.

Opinion delivered November 21, 2023.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

(DO NOT PUBLISH)
3

COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

NOVEMBER 21, 2023

NO. 12-23-00242-CR

CHRISTOPHER EDWARD PARKS,

Relator

V.

PENNY CLARKSTON AND JENNIFER LOWRENCE

Respondents

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed by 

Christopher Edward Parks; who is the relator in appellate cause number 12-23-00242-CR and the 

defendant in trial court cause number 114-0558-17, formerly pending on the docket of the 114th 

Judicial District Court of Smith County, Texas. Said petition for writ of mandamus having been 

filed herein on September 18, 2023, and the same having been duly considered, because it is the 

opinion of this Court that it lacks jurisdiction, it is therefore CONSIDERED, ADJUDGED and 

ORDERED that the said petition for writ of mandamus be, and the same is, hereby dismissed for 

want of jurisdiction.

By per curiam opinion.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.