Court Opinion

ID: 9955313
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-28 09:15:41.272284+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:15:31.229177
License: Public Domain

In The
                                Court of Appeals
                       Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

                                         No. 07-24-00104-CR

                           IN RE JOE MARR WILSON, RELATOR

                                  ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

                                          March 27, 2024
                              MEMORANDUM OPINION
                       Before QUINN, C.J., and PARKER and DOSS, JJ.

       On March 25, 2024, Relator Joe Marr Wilson filed his petition for writ of mandamus

with this Court seeking our issuance of a writ of mandamus finding that Respondent, the

Honorable Ana E. Estevez, in her capacity as Presiding Judge of the Ninth Administrative

Judicial Region, abused her discretion by affirming the trial court’s order, which paid only

part of Relator’s requested attorney’s fees in relation to his appellate representation in

Westmoreland v. State, No. 07-23-00086-CR, 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS 6605 (Tex. App.—

Amarillo Aug. 25, 2023, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication). We dismiss

the petition for want of jurisdiction.
      Our jurisdiction to issue mandamus is limited by statute. See TEX. GOV’T CODE

ANN. § 22.221(a), (b). As we noted in dismissing another mandamus petition filed by

Relator, his petition challenges Judge Estevez’s rulings in her capacity as the presiding

regional administrative judge for the Ninth Administrative Region. See In re Wilson, 07-

24-00103-CR, 2024 Tex. App. LEXIS ____ (Tex. App.—Amarillo Mar. 26, 2024, orig.

proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication). We lack authority to issue a writ

of mandamus against a judge acting in that capacity. Id. See also In re Hettler, 110

S.W.3d 152, 154 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2003, orig. proceeding); accord In re Cook, 394

S.W.3d 668, 671 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2012, orig. proceeding) (concluding that the court

“lack[ed] mandamus jurisdiction against a regional presiding judge”).

      Because we lack authority to grant the relief sought by Relator, we dismiss his

petition for writ of mandamus, expressing no opinion on the merits.

                                                      Lawrence M. Doss
                                                         Justice

Do not publish.

                                           2