Court Opinion

ID: 9410434
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-21 09:15:53.527878+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:57.821176
License: Public Domain

IN THE
                            TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

                                   No. 10-23-00213-CR

                           IN RE BRYAN STALLWORTH

                                   Original Proceeding

                             From the 12th District Court
                                Walker County, Texas
                                Trial Court No. 30582

                            MEMORANDUM OPINION

       In this original proceeding, Relator Bryan Stallworth seeks mandamus relief in the

form of compelling the Respondent trial judge to hear and rule on several of his motions.

       A court with mandamus authority “will grant mandamus relief if relator can

demonstrate that the act sought to be compelled is purely ‘ministerial’ and that relator

has no other adequate legal remedy.” In re Piper, 105 S.W.3d 107, 109 (Tex. App.—Waco

2003, orig. proceeding) (quoting State ex rel. Rosenthal v. Poe, 98 S.W.3d 194, 197–99 (Tex.

Crim. App. 2003) (orig. proceeding)). Consideration of a motion properly filed and before

the trial court is ministerial. State ex rel. Hill v. Court of Appeals for Fifth Dist., 34 S.W.3d
924, 927 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (orig. proceeding). A trial judge has a reasonable time to

perform the ministerial duty of considering and ruling on a motion properly filed and

before the judge. In re Chavez, 62 S.W.3d 225, 228 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2001, orig.

proceeding). But that duty generally does not arise until the movant has brought the

motion to the trial judge’s attention, and mandamus will not lie unless the movant makes

such a showing, and the trial judge then fails or refuses to rule within a reasonable time.

In re Rangel, 570 S.W.3d 968, 969 (Tex. App.—Waco 2019, orig. proceeding); see Chavez, 62

S.W.3d at 228.

        Stallworth bears the burden of providing this Court with a sufficient record to

establish his right to mandamus relief. See Rangel, 570 S.W.3d at 969; In re Blakeney, 254

S.W.3d 659, 661 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2008, orig. proceeding). The record here does not

show that Stallworth has brought any of the motions in question to the attention of the

trial judge and that the trial judge has then failed or refused to rule within a reasonable

time. Accordingly, we deny Stallworth’s petition for writ of mandamus.

                                                MATT JOHNSON
                                                Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,*
       Justice Johnson, and
       Justice Smith
       *(Chief Justice Gray concurs in the judgment. A separate opinion will not issue.)
Petition denied
Opinion delivered and filed July 19, 2023
Do not publish
[OT06]

In re Stallworth                                                                     Page 2