Court Opinion

ID: 9410426
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-21 07:09:15.895038+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:57.691146
License: Public Domain

In The

                                Court of Appeals

                    Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

                               __________________

                               NO. 09-23-00192-CR
                               __________________

                       IN RE RAYMOND PEOPLES JR.

__________________________________________________________________

                          Original Proceeding
           Criminal District Court of Jefferson County, Texas
__________________________________________________________________

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Through a pro se petition for a writ of mandamus filed as an original

proceeding with this Court, Raymond Peoples Jr. complains that the trial court

refused to file an application for a writ of habeas corpus under article 11.08 of the

Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. He asks this Court to compel the trial court to

accept his writ application. Peoples has not shown that he is currently under

indictment for a criminal case filed in the Criminal District Court of Jefferson

County, nor has he shown that he is currently acting as pro se in the trial court and

                                         1
is not represented by counsel. 1 Accordingly, we deny the petition for a writ of

mandamus without prejudice. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).

      PETITION DENIED.

                                                            PER CURIAM

Submitted on July 18, 2023
Opinion Delivered July 19, 2023
Do Not Publish

Before Golemon, C.J., Johnson and Wright, JJ.

      1
         We note that the mandamus petition suffers from notable defects. See Tex.
R. App. P. 52. Peoples fails to identify the real party in interest or certify that he
served a copy of his mandamus petition on the respondent and on the real party in
interest. See id. at 52.2, 52.3(a); see also Tex. R. App. P. 9.5. The petition lacks the
information required by Rule 52.3(b) – (h). We use Rule 2, however, to look beyond
these deficiencies to reach an expeditious result. See Tex. R. App. P. 2.
                                             2