Court Opinion

ID: 2922404
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 02:56:31.420214+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:38:51.287070
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-05-394-CR
 
                         COURT OF APPEALS
 
               THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
 
                  CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
__________________________________________________________________
 
          IN RE DANIEL GARZA
__________________________________________________________________
 
                      On Petition for Writ of
Mandamus __________________________________________________________________
 
                     MEMORANDUM OPINION
 
       Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Hinojosa and
Rodriguez
                            Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion[1]
 
 
Relator Daniel Garza, a pro se inmate, requests we
compel the judge of the 214th District Court of Nueces County to rule on
relator=s motion for DNA testing and for appointment of
counsel pursuant to article 64.01 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.  See Tex.
Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 64.01 (Vernon Supp. 2004-05). 

When a motion is properly pending before a trial
court, the act of considering and ruling upon it is a ministerial act.  Eli Lilly & Co. v. Marshall, 829
S.W.2d 157, 158 (Tex. 1992).  However,
before relator may be entitled to mandamus relief, he must provide a sufficient
record to show the motion was presented to the trial court and it refused to
act.  In re Villarreal, 96 S.W.3d
708, 710 n.2 (Tex. App.BAmarillo 2003, orig. proceeding) (filing something
with the district clerk does not demonstrate that a motion has been brought to
the trial court's attention).   Relator's
petition is not accompanied by a certified or sworn copy of the motion that is
the subject of his complaint as required by Rule 52.3(j)(1)(A) of the Texas
Rules of Appellate Procedure.  See
Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(j)(1)(A).  Thus, we conclude he has not satisfied his
procedural burden to show entitlement to mandamus relief.  See Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833,
837 (Tex. 1992).  
Accordingly, relator's petition for writ of mandamus
is denied.
 
                                                            PER
CURIAM
 
Do
not publish.  Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b). 

 
 
Memorandum
Opinion delivered and filed
this
14th day of July, 2005.