Court Opinion

ID: 9951791
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-19 10:14:54.338915+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:42:47.269395
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

                                       NO. 03-24-00157-CV

                                In re Phillip “Baby Shark” 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 “Abuse-of-

Discretion & Clear Error Review,” complaining of an ex parte hearing allegedly held pursuant to

Chapter 46B of the Code of Criminal Procedure in cause number CR2023-382, and asking us 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).

               To the extent Scott seeks relief that is within this Court’s jurisdiction to grant, it is

relator’s burden to properly request and show entitlement to mandamus relief. Walker v. Packer,

827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992); In re Davidson, 153 S.W.3d 490, 491 (Tex. App.–Amarillo

2004, orig. proceeding); see also Barnes v. State, 832 S.W.2d 424, 426 (Tex. App.–Houston [1st

Dist.] 1992, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (“Even a pro se applicant for a writ of mandamus

must show himself entitled to the extraordinary relief he seeks”). In this regard, the relator must
provide the reviewing court with a record sufficient to establish his right to mandamus relief.

See Walker, 827 S.W.2d at 837; In re Blakeney, 254 S.W.3d at 661–62; 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 and

dismiss the pending motion as moot. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).

                                              __________________________________________
                                              Darlene Byrne, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Smith and Theofanis

Filed: March 14, 2024

                                                 2