in Re Michael Joseph Griffith, Relator ( 2012 )

MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-12-00226-CR
IN RE Michael Joseph GRIFFITH
Original Mandamus Proceeding 1
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice
Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice
Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Delivered and Filed: May 2, 2012
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED
On April 18, 2012, Relator Michael Joseph Griffith filed a petition for writ of mandamus
complaining that the Honorable Rex Emerson has failed to appoint counsel to aid relator in filing
a motion for DNA testing pursuant to Article 64 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. TEX.
CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 64.01(c) (West 2011). Because relator has failed to comply with the
requirements of chapter 64, we deny the requested relief.
Article 64.01(c) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure was amended in 2003. As
amended, the trial court shall provide appointed counsel only if: (1) the convicted individual
informs the court of his desire to submit a motion under this chapter; (2) the court finds
reasonable grounds for the motion to be filed, and (3) the court makes a determination that the
1
This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 573257, styled State of Texas v. Michael Joseph Griffith, in the 198th
Judicial District Court, Mason County, Texas, the Honorable Rex Emerson presiding.
04-12-00226-CR
convicted individual is indigent. Id. Although Relator’s Request for Appointment of Counsel
Pursuant to Article 64, filed on February 23, 2012, informs the court of his desire to file a motion
and of his indigency, the motion does not address the second prong of the requirements set forth
in Chapter 64. See In re Ludwig, 162 S.W.3d 454, 454-55 (Tex. App.—Waco 2005, orig.
proceeding) (“[E]ven if the convicting court determines that a convicted person is indigent, the
court would not be required to appoint counsel if it found there were no reasonable grounds for
the motion to be filed.”); In re Braziel, No. 14-09-00489-CR, 2009 WL 1678096 (Tex. App.—
Houston [14th Dist.] 2009, orig. proceeding).
Accordingly, relator’s petition for writ of mandamus is denied.
PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH
-2-