Court Opinion

ID: 2884835
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-07 18:05:45.821492+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:21:00.880728
License: Public Domain

ANTONIO SEPEDA V. JOHN MANN

 	07-00-0420-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL C

NOVEMBER 14, 2000

______________________________

ANTONIO SEPEDA,

Appellants

v.

JOHN MANN, GRAY COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY,

Appellee

______________________________

FROM THE 223rd JUDICIAL DISTRICT FOR GRAY COUNTY;

NO. 31,743; HON. LEE WATERS, PRESIDING

______________________________

Before QUINN and REAVIS and JOHNSON, JJ.

Antonio Sepeda appeals from an order dismissing his petition for writ of mandamus.
(footnote: 1)  Through the writ, he sought an order directing John Mann, Gray County District Attorney, to prosecute a criminal complaint filed by Sepeda.  The sole issue on appeal concerns whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying the petition.
(footnote: 2)  We affirm.

Whether to initiate a criminal prosecution lies within the district attorney’s discretion.  
Barefield v. State
, 784 S.W.2d 38, 46 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989) (noting that the prosecutor has such discretion).  And, its decision to forego a particular prosecution is not subject to mandamus.  
Taylor v. Gately
, 870 S.W.2d 204, 204-205 (Tex. App.–Waco 1994, writ dism’d w.o.j.).  Thus, the trial court did not err in denying the writ and we affirm its order of dismissal.

Brian Quinn

   Justice

Do not publish.

 

FOOTNOTES
1:1
 
An action for mandamus initiated in a district court is subject to appeal as in any other civil suit.  
Hart v. Gossum
, 995 S.W.2d 958, 960 (Tex. App.--Fort Worth 1999, no pet.)

2:2
 
The appellee did not favor us with an appellee’s brief and the time to file same has expired.  Thus, we submit the cause solely on the appellant’s brief.