Court Opinion

ID: 9956440
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-02 13:09:06.264853+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:17:32.630014
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

                                     NO. 03-24-00189-CV

                                         In re Phillip Scott

                     ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM COMAL COUNTY

                           MEMORANDUM OPINION

               Relator Phillip Scott, an inmate in the Comal County Jail, has filed an

ambiguously captioned pro se appellate submission with this Court entitled “Clear Error

Review,” complaining of alleged procedural irregularities in a civil commitment hearing under

Chapter 46B of the Code of Criminal Procedure in the 207th District Court, and asking this

Court to vacate a civil commitment order allegedly entered in that case on July 19, 2023. Having

reviewed the filing, we treat the submission as a petition for writ of mandamus and deny the

petition. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).

               We take judicial notice of a previous submission to this Court in which

Scott raised substantially similar issues and sought identical relief.       See In re Scott,

No. 03-24-00157-CV, 2024 WL 1098217 (Tex. App.—Austin Mar. 14, 2024, no pet. h., orig.

proceeding) (mem. op.). As discussed in this Court’s memorandum opinion denying relief in

that case, it is relator’s burden to properly request and show entitlement to mandamus relief,

including by providing the reviewing court with a record sufficient to establish his right to
mandamus relief. See Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992); see also Tex. R.

App. P. 52.7(a)(1) (relator must file with petition “a certified or sworn copy of every document

that is material to the relator’s claim for relief and that was filed in any underlying proceeding”),

52.7(a) (specifying required contents for record), 52.3(k) (specifying required contents for

appendix).

               Based on his failure to provide any record, we conclude that Scott has failed to

show an entitlement to relief. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See Tex.

R. App. P. 52.8(a).

                                              __________________________________________
                                              Rosa Lopez Theofanis, Justice

Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Smith and Theofanis

Filed: March 27, 2024

                                                 2