in Re: Willie Otis Harris ( 2014 )

Deny and Opinion Filed August 7, 2014
S In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-14-00968-CV
No. 05-14-00969-CV
No. 05-14-00970-CV
No. 05-14-00971-CV
No. 05-14-00972-CV
IN RE WILLIE OTIS HARRIS, Relator
Original Proceeding from the 304th Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F91-45092; F91-45093; F91-45123; F91-70666; F91-70667
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices FitzGerald, Francis, and Lewis
Opinion by Justice Francis
Relator filed this petition for writ of mandamus requesting that the Court order the trial
court to rule on his motion for new trial. The facts and issues are well known to the parties so we
do not recount them here. To demonstrate entitlement to a writ of mandamus in a criminal case, a
relator must establish that (1) the trial court failed to perform a purely ministerial duty, and (2)
relator has no other adequate legal remedy. State ex rel. Hill v. Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Dist., 34 S.W.3d 924, 927 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001). A trial court has no obligation to rule on a
motion for new trial because it is overruled by operation of law if the trial court fails to rule
within seventy-five days. TEX. R. APP. P. 21.8; In re Boykin, No. 09-12-00361-CR, 2012 WL
4033333, at *1 (Tex. App.—Beaumont Sept. 12, 2012, orig. proceeding); In re Bullock, No. 12-
11-00258-CR, 2011 WL 5420842, at *1 (Tex. App.—Tyler Nov. 9, 2011, orig. proceeding).
Accordingly, relator has not demonstrated that the trial court has failed to perform a ministerial
duty. We DENY the petition for writ of mandamus.
140968F.P05 /Molly Francis/
MOLLY FRANCIS
JUSTICE
–2–