in Re Jason Bernard Williams ( 2014 )

In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
____________________
NO. 09-14-00508-CR
____________________
IN RE JASON BERNARD WILLIAMS
_______________________________________________________ ______________
Original Proceeding
________________________________________________________ _____________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In a petition for writ of mandamus, Jason Bernard Williams contends the
Judge of the 1-A District Court of Newton County, Texas, violated a ministerial
duty to vacate a judgment that Williams contends is void. According to Williams,
following his plea bargain, he was convicted in 1993 of capital murder and
sentenced to life in prison. Williams argues his conviction is void because a jury
cannot be waived in a capital case. But see Act of May 27, 1991, 72nd Leg., R.S.,
Ch. 652, § 1, 1991 Tex. Gen. Laws 2394, 2394 (effective September 1, 1991)
(current version at Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 1.13 (West Supp. 2014))
(authorizing waiver of jury trial for an offense other than a capital felony case in
which the State seeks the death penalty).
1
Williams failed to furnish an appendix or record supporting his claim for
relief. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(k), 52.7. Because the trial court’s jurisdiction
expires when a case becomes final or is taken to a higher court, Williams cannot
demonstrate the trial court must act on his request to set aside the judgment. The
information in Williams’ petition for mandamus shows that the trial court’s
jurisdiction over his case expired long before September 30, 2014, the date
Williams claimed he filed a motion with the trial court seeking relief from his
conviction. See State v. Patrick, 86 S.W.3d 592, 596-97 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002).
To obtain relief in a writ of mandamus proceeding, a relator must establish
that the trial court failed to perform a ministerial duty, and that the relator has no
other adequate legal remedy. See State ex rel. Hill v. Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Dist., 34 S.W.3d 924, 927 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001). Because Williams has not
demonstrated that he is entitled to the relief sought in his petition, we deny his
petition for writ of mandamus.
PETITION DENIED.
PER CURIAM
Submitted on December 9, 2014
Opinion Delivered December 10, 2014
Do Not Publish
Before McKeithen, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.
2