in Re Walter Hinton Junior ( 2022 )


Menu:
  • Petition for Writ of Mandamus Dismissed and Memorandum Majority and
    Dissenting Opinions filed November 1, 2022.
    In The
    Fourteenth Court of Appeals
    NO. 14-22-00543-CR
    IN RE WALTER HINTON JUNIOR, Relator
    ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
    WRIT OF MANDAMUS
    262nd District Court
    Harris County, Texas
    Trial Court Cause No. 1316867
    MEMORANDUM MAJORITY OPINION
    On July 25, 2022, relator Walter Hinton Junior filed a petition for writ of
    mandamus in this court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221; see also Tex. R. App.
    P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this court to compel the Honorable Lori
    Chambers Gray, presiding judge of the 262nd District Court of Harris County, to
    rule on his motion to appoint counsel for Chapter 64 DNA testing. See Tex. Code
    Crim. Proc. art. 64.01(c).
    We sent relator notice that his petition did not comply with Texas Rules of
    Appellate Procedure 52.3(k)(1)(A) and 52.7(a). Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(k)(1)(A)
    (“The appendix must contain: (A) a certified or sworn copy of any order
    complained of, or any other document showing the matter complained of”); 52.7(a)
    (“Relator must file with the petition: (1) a certified or sworn copy of every
    document that is material to the relator’s claim for relief and that was filed in any
    underlying proceeding; and (2) a properly authenticated transcript of any relevant
    testimony from any underlying proceeding, including any exhibits offered in
    evidence, or a statement that no testimony was adduced in connection with the
    matter complained.”). We further gave relator notice that the petition would be
    dismissed unless a compliant amended petition was filed by September 16, 2022.
    See In re Kholaif, 
    624 S.W.3d 228
    , 231 (order), mand. dism’d, 
    615 S.W.3d 369
    (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2020) (orig. proceeding).
    Relator filed an amended petition that partially complied with our order.
    Relator included sworn copies of the material documents, but he did not include a
    properly authenticated transcript of any relevant testimony from any underlying
    proceeding or a statement that no testimony was adduced in connection with the
    matter complained. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.7(a)(2). Accordingly, we dismiss
    relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. See Kholaif, 624 S.W.3d at 231; see also
    In re Hughes, 
    607 S.W.3d 136
    , 137–8 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2020, no
    pet.) (dismissing mandamus petition in criminal case due to noncompliance with
    2
    Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 52.3 and 52.7(a). We express no opinion on
    the merits of the petition.
    /s/       Charles A. Spain
    Justice
    Panel consists of Justices Zimmerer, Spain, and Poissant. (Poissant, J., dissenting.)
    Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-22-00543-CR

Filed Date: 11/1/2022

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 11/7/2022