Court Opinion

ID: 9939629
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-11 08:16:20.78969+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:41:40.373588
License: Public Domain

Petition for Writ of Mandamus Dismissed and Opinion filed February 6, 2024.

                                     In The

                    Fourteenth Court of Appeals

                               NO. 14-23-00877-CR

                IN RE DARREN TRAMEL HUGHES, Relator

                         ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
                           WRIT OF MANDAMUS
                              179th District Court
                            Harris County, Texas
                        Trial Court Cause No. 1494203

                        MEMORANDUM OPINION

      On Monday, November 20, 2023, relator Darren Tramel Hughes filed a
petition for writ of mandamus in this court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221;
see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this court to compel the
Honorable Ana Martinez, presiding judge of the 179th District Court of Harris
County, to rule on two of his motions: (1) Motion to Dismiss Court Appointed
Attorney and Appoint New Counsel and (2) Request for Release / or Request for
Bond.

        By order dated January 4, 2024, this court advised relator that his petition
did not comply with Rules 52.3(k), and 52.7(a) of the Texas Rules of Appellate
Procedure. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(k), 52.7(a). In the order, the court notified
relator that the petition would be dismissed unless an amended petition addressing
the record issues was filed by January 25, 2024.

        On January 19, 2024, relator filed an amended petition. The amended
petition does not comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure in that (1) it
does not have an appendix containing a certified or sworn copy of any document
showing the matter complained and (2) it does not contain a certified or sworn
copy of every document that is material to the relator’s claim for relief and that
was filed in the underlying proceeding and a properly authenticated transcript of
any relevant testimony from any underlying proceeding, including any exhibits
offered in evidence, or a statement that no testimony was adduced in connection
with the matter complained. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(k), 52.7(a); see also Tex.
Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 131.001 (allowing use of unsworn declarations).
Furthermore relator does not state under penalty of perjury that such documents
exist and he has been denied copies of them.

        As such, relator’s petition for writ of mandamus is dismissed.

                                   PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Wise, Bourliot, and Spain.
                                           2
Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

                                      3