in Re: Tracy Ray Gibson ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                                      NOS. 12-16-00271-CR
    12-16-00272-CR
    12-16-00273-CR
    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
    TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT
    TYLER, TEXAS
    IN RE:                                                 §
    TRACY RAY GIBSON,                                      §       ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
    RELATOR                                                §
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    PER CURIAM
    Relator Tracy Gibson was convicted of robbery in three separate cause numbers. His
    sentence was imposed on April 4, 2016. On September 21, 2016 (more than five months after
    sentence was imposed), he filed a notice of appeal in each cause number (appellate cause
    numbers 12-16-00167-CR, 12-16-00168-CR, and 12-16-00169-CR).1
    In these original mandamus proceedings, Relator provided a copy of his “Motion for
    Denial of Allocution Rights,” which he filed in the trial court. In the motion, he identifies certain
    errors that he contends occurred at trial and informs the trial court that these errors require
    reversal. Relator asserts that the motion was filed more than thirty days ago and the trial court
    has not yet ruled on it. He requests a writ of mandamus directing the trial court to rule on the
    motion. He argues that, because his notice of appeal from each of his convictions was untimely,
    he has no remedy available except mandamus.
    A trial court has a ministerial duty to rule upon a properly filed and timely presented
    motion. See State ex rel. Young v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Court of Appeals, 
    236 S.W.3d 207
    , 210
    (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (orig. proceeding). In general, however, it does not have a duty to rule
    1
    On September 22, 2016, this Court notified Appellant that his notice of appeal in these cause numbers
    was untimely and gave him an opportunity to show the jurisdiction of this Court. His deadline for doing so is
    October 7, 2016.
    on “free-floating motions unrelated to currently pending actions. In fact, it has no jurisdiction to
    rule on a motion when it has no plenary jurisdiction coming from an associated case.” In re
    Cash, No. 06-04-00045-CV, 
    2004 WL 769473
    , at *1 (Tex. App.–Texarkana Apr. 13, 2004, orig.
    proceeding).
    In a criminal case, if no party timely files a motion for new trial, a motion in arrest of
    judgment, or other similar motion, the trial court’s plenary power expires thirty days after
    sentence is imposed or an appealable order is issued. TEX. R. APP. P. 21.4, 22.3; Collins v. State,
    
    240 S.W.3d 925
    , 927 n.2 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Relator has not shown that he filed any
    motion that extended the trial court’s plenary power. Therefore, the trial court’s plenary power
    expired on May 4, 2016 –thirty days after his sentence was imposed. The record indicates that
    Relator filed his “Motion for Denial of Allocution of Rights” on or after August 8, 2016.
    Because the trial court’s plenary power has expired, it has no jurisdiction to rule on Relator’s
    motion. Accordingly, Relator is not entitled to mandamus relief, and we deny his petition for
    writ of mandamus.
    Opinion delivered September 30, 2016.
    Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.
    (DO NOT PUBLISH)
    2
    COURT OF APPEALS
    TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS
    JUDGMENT
    SEPTEMBER 30, 2016
    NO. 12-16-00271-CR
    TRACY RAY GIBSON,
    Relator
    V.
    HON. CAMPBELL COX, II,
    Respondent
    ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
    ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed
    by TRACY RAY GIBSON, who is the relator in Cause No.F149622007, pending on the docket
    of the 145th Judicial District Court of Nacogdoches County, Texas. Said petition for writ of
    mandamus having been filed herein on September 26, 2016, and the same having been duly
    considered, because it is the opinion of this Court that a writ of mandamus should not issue, it is
    therefore CONSIDERED, ADJUDGED and ORDERED that the said petition for writ of
    mandamus be, and the same is, hereby DENIED.
    By per curiam opinion.
    Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.
    COURT OF APPEALS
    TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS
    JUDGMENT
    SEPTEMBER 30, 2016
    NO. 12-16-00272-CR
    TRACY RAY GIBSON,
    Relator
    V.
    HON. CAMPBELL COX, II,
    Respondent
    ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
    ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed
    by TRACY RAY GIBSON, who is the relator in Cause No.F149632007, pending on the docket
    of the 145th Judicial District Court of Nacogdoches County, Texas. Said petition for writ of
    mandamus having been filed herein on September 26, 2016, and the same having been duly
    considered, because it is the opinion of this Court that a writ of mandamus should not issue, it is
    therefore CONSIDERED, ADJUDGED and ORDERED that the said petition for writ of
    mandamus be, and the same is, hereby DENIED.
    By per curiam opinion.
    Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.
    COURT OF APPEALS
    TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS
    JUDGMENT
    SEPTEMBER 30, 2016
    NO. 12-16-00273-CR
    TRACY RAY GIBSON,
    Relator
    V.
    HON. CAMPBELL COX, II,
    Respondent
    ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
    ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed
    by TRACY RAY GIBSON, who is the relator in Cause No.F149642007, pending on the docket
    of the 145th Judicial District Court of Nacogdoches County, Texas. Said petition for writ of
    mandamus having been filed herein on September 26, 2016, and the same having been duly
    considered, because it is the opinion of this Court that a writ of mandamus should not issue, it is
    therefore CONSIDERED, ADJUDGED and ORDERED that the said petition for writ of
    mandamus be, and the same is, hereby DENIED.
    By per curiam opinion.
    Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 12-16-00272-CR

Filed Date: 9/30/2016

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/4/2016