in Re: Lavace Durell Morgan ( 2022 )


Menu:
  • DENY and Opinion October 28, 2022
    S   In The
    Court of Appeals
    Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
    No. 05-22-01116-CV
    IN RE LAVACE DURELL MORGAN, Relator
    Original Proceeding from the 354th District Court
    Hunt County, Texas
    Trial Court Cause No. 21838
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Partida-Kipness, and Justice Smith
    Opinion by Chief Justice Burns
    Before the Court is relator’s October 13, 2022 petition for a writ of mandamus
    wherein relator seeks relief against the trial court and the Hunt County District Clerk,
    although the name relator gives for the district clerk appears to be the name of the
    Hunt County Chief Deputy. Relator petitions this Court to compel respondents to
    send a copy of his judgment of conviction to the Texas Department of Criminal
    Justice.
    To the extent relator seeks relief against the district clerk or chief deputy, we
    lack jurisdiction. This Court’s power to grant writs in original proceedings is
    conferred by § 22.221 of the Texas Government Code. We do not have writ
    jurisdiction over a district clerk or chief deputy unless it is necessary to enforce our
    jurisdiction in another proceeding. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 22.221(a), (b); In
    re Meeks, No. 06-22-00033-CV, 
    2022 WL 1559081
    , at *1 (Tex. App.—Texarkana
    May 18, 2022, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (chief deputy); In re Cabrera, No. 05-
    15-01106-CV, 
    2015 WL 5692735
    , at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Sept. 29, 2015, orig.
    proceeding) (mem. op.) (district clerk).
    Relator does have an appeal pending before this Court. But relator does not
    refer to that appeal in his petition. He gives no reason why the relief sought is
    necessary to enforce our jurisdiction in that proceeding, and we can ascertain no such
    reason based on the petition before us. Further, to the extent relator seeks relief
    against the district clerk or chief deputy so that he may prepare a petition for writ of
    habeas corpus, the relief sought is not necessary to enforce our jurisdiction. See TEX.
    GOV’T CODE ANN. § 22.221(a). This is because this Court does not have jurisdiction
    over post-conviction habeas corpus proceedings. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN.
    art. 11.05; see also Cabrera, 
    2015 WL 5692735
    , at *1.
    To the extent relator seeks relief against the trial court, relator has not
    demonstrated entitlement to mandamus relief. To establish a right to mandamus
    relief in a criminal case, the relator must show that the trial court violated a
    ministerial duty and there is no adequate remedy at law. In re State ex rel. Weeks,
    
    391 S.W.3d 117
    , 122 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (orig. proceeding).
    Relator’s petition does not comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate
    Procedure in numerous respects. See, e.g., TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(a)–(c), 52.3(d)(2)–
    –2–
    (3), 52.3(e), 52.3(g)–(k), 52.7(a)(1). For instance, relator states that he “certifies
    under oath the above is true[,] correct[,] and complete under penalty of perjury.” But
    this certification does not comply with rule 52.3(j). See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(j); In re
    Reed, No. 05-20-00086-CV, 
    2020 WL 1227172
    , at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Mar. 13,
    2020, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.). The petition is also not supported by an
    appendix or record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1)(A), 52.7(a)(1); In re Butler, 
    270 S.W.3d 757
    , 759 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, orig. proceeding). Relator bears the
    burden of providing the Court with a sufficient record to show he is entitled to relief.
    Walker v. Packer, 
    827 S.W.2d 833
    , 837 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). Without a
    certified petition and appendix or record, relator has not carried his burden. See In
    re Jones, No. 05-22-01113-CV, 
    2022 WL 12338493
    , at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Oct.
    21, 2022, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.); Butler, 
    270 S.W.3d at
    758–59.
    Accordingly, to the extent relator seeks a writ of mandamus against the district
    clerk or chief deputy, we dismiss relator’s petition for want of jurisdiction. To the
    extent relator seeks a writ of mandamus against the trial court, we deny relator’s
    petition. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).
    /Robert D. Burns, III/
    ROBERT D. BURNS, III
    CHIEF JUSTICE
    221116F.P05
    –3–
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 05-22-01116-CV

Filed Date: 10/28/2022

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 11/2/2022