Court Opinion

ID: 4659843
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2021-02-12 08:15:08.222798+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:04:58.174535
License: Public Domain

In The

                                Court of Appeals

                    Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

                               __________________

                               NO. 09-21-00002-CR
                               __________________

                          IN RE CHARLES MATULA

__________________________________________________________________

                           Original Proceeding
            9th District Court of Montgomery County, Texas
                     Trial Cause No. SW-2020, #599
__________________________________________________________________

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Through a petition for a writ of mandamus and a motion for temporary relief,

Charles Matula seeks to stay execution on a search warrant issued on October 2,

2020, by the judge of the 9th District Court of Montgomery County, Texas, in his

capacity as a magistrate and to compel the judge to quash the search warrant. 1 See

      1
        We denied mandamus relief in a proceeding filed by Matula after the trial
court signed an order denying a motion to quash on November 6, 2020. See In re
Matula, No. 09-20-00256-CR, 2020 WL 6929643, at *1 (Tex. App.—Beaumont
Nov. 25, 2020, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication). Matula
alleged he is the owner of the Yahoo account that is the subject of the search warrant
in an amended motion to quash the search warrant. This mandamus proceeding
                                         1
State ex rel. Holmes v. Salinas, 774 S.W.2d 421, 422-23 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th

Dist.] 1989, orig. proceeding).

      To be entitled to mandamus relief, a relator must show that he has no adequate

remedy at law available and that he seeks to compel a ministerial act. State ex rel.

Healey v. McMeans, 884 S.W.2d 772, 774 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994) (orig.

proceeding). An act is ministerial when the law clearly spells out the duty to be

performed with such certainty that nothing is left to the exercise of discretion or

judgment. Id. Relator has not shown that he has a clear and indisputable right to the

relief sought. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus and motion

for temporary relief. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).

      PETITION DENIED.

                                                          PER CURIAM

Submitted on February 9, 2021
Opinion Delivered February 10, 2021
Do Not Publish

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

followed the trial court’s denial of the amended motion to quash on December 16,
2020.
                                          2