Court Opinion

ID: 9409498
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-18 15:08:38.113215+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:51.061088
License: Public Domain

Fourth Court of Appeals
                                       San Antonio, Texas

                                   MEMORANDUM OPINION

                                           No. 04-23-00220-CR

                          EX PARTE Jesus Manuel CAMPOS CISNEROS

                                           Original Proceeding 1

PER CURIAM

Sitting:          Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice
                  Irene Rios, Justice
                  Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

Delivered and Filed: July 12, 2023

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

           On March 9, 2023, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus. Relator also filed an

emergency motion to stay the underlying proceeding pending disposition of the petition for writ

of mandamus.

           For mandamus relief in a criminal case, a relator has the burden to show the trial court

violated a ministerial duty and there is no adequate remedy at law. See State ex rel. Young v. Sixth

Jud. Dist. Ct. of Apps. at Texarkana, 236 S.W.3d 207, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (orig.

proceeding). A trial court has a ministerial duty to rule on a properly filed and timely presented

motion. See id. However, a relator has the burden of providing this court with a sufficient record.

See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a)(1). A relator must provide the court of appeals with a record showing

1
 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 13542CR, styled State of Texas v. Jesus Manuel Campos Cisneros, pending
in the County Court, Kinney County, Texas, the Honorable Susan D. Reed presiding.
                                                                                           04-23-00220-CR

the motion at issue was properly filed, the trial court was made aware of the motion, and the trial

court has refused to rule on the motion or has not ruled on the motion for an unreasonable time

period. See In re Mendoza, 131 S.W.3d 167, 167–68 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2004, orig.

proceeding); Barnes v. State, 832 S.W.2d 424, 426–27 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, orig.

proceeding).

        Here, the record contains a copy of relator’s application for writ of habeas corpus.

However, the copy of relator’s habeas application is not file-stamped, and this record does not

establish that the trial court was aware of relator’s filing or that the trial court has failed to rule for

an unreasonable period of time. See id. Based on the record before us, relator has not satisfied his

mandamus burden. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See TEX. R. APP. P.

52.8(a). Relator’s emergency motion to stay is denied as moot.

                                                     PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH

                                                   -2-