eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 State Courts
 Court of Appeals of Texas
 2008-11

in Re: Billy J. Basham ( 2008 )


Menu:

  •   







    NUMBER 13-08-00629-CV



    COURT OF APPEALS



    THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS



    CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG



    IN RE BILLY J. BASHAM


    On Petition for Writ of Mandamus


    MEMORANDUM OPINION


    Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Vela

    Memorandum Opinion (1)
    Per Curiam



    Relator, Billy J. Basham, filed a petition for writ of mandamus on August 11, 2008, seeking relief from an order directing the withdrawal of funds from relator's inmate trust account. (2) The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus, is of the opinion that relator has not shown himself entitled to the relief sought. Mandamus relief is proper only to correct a clear abuse of discretion when there is no adequate remedy by appeal. See In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135-36 (Tex. 2004); Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 839 (Tex. 1992). The relator has the burden of establishing both prerequisites to mandamus relief. In re CSX Corp., 124 S.W.3d 149, 151 (Tex. 2003) (orig. proceeding). This burden is a heavy one. See In re Epic Holdings, Inc., 985 S.W.2d 41 (Tex. 1998)

    In the instant case, relator has failed to meet this burden. The petition for writ of mandamus and accompanying documents do not establish a clear abuse of discretion by the trial court. See generally Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(h), 52.3(k), 52.7. Moreover, relator has not demonstrated that he lacks an adequate remedy by appeal. See In re Johnson, No. AP-75,898, slip. op. ¶ 22 (Tex. Crim. App. Oct. 29, 2008) (orig. proceeding), available at http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/HTMLOPINIONINFO.ASP?OPINIONID=17534; Reed v. State, No. 04-07-00004-CV, 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS 5085, at *20 (Tex. App.-San Antonio July 9, 2008, no pet.) (op.); Abdullah v. State, 211 S.W.3d 938, 940-41 (Tex. App.-Texarkana 2007, no pet.).

    Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).

    PER CURIAM





    Memorandum Opinion delivered and

    filed this 13th day of November, 2008.



    1. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(d) ("When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not required to do so."); Tex. R. App. P. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions).

    2. This cause was originally docketed in this Court as a criminal matter. See In re Basham, No. 13-08-00478-CR, 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS ___, at *1 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi Nov. __, 2008, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op.).