In Re Joe Marr Wilson, Relator v. the State of Texas ( 2024 )

In The
Court of Appeals
Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo
No. 07-24-00103-CR
IN RE JOE MARR WILSON, RELATOR
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
March 26, 2024
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before QUINN, C.J., and PARKER and DOSS, JJ.
On March 25, 2024, Relator Joe Marr Wilson filed his petition for writ of mandamus
with this Court seeking our issuance of a writ of mandamus finding that Respondent, the
Honorable Ana E. Estevez, in her capacity as Presiding Judge of the Ninth Administrative
Judicial Region, abused her discretion by affirming the trial court’s order, which paid only
part of Relator’s requested attorney’s fees in relation to his appellate representation in
Stanberry v. State, No. 07-23-00194-CR, 2024 Tex. App. LEXIS 1066 (Tex. App.—
Amarillo Feb. 9, 2024, no pet. h.) (mem. op., not designated for publication). We dismiss
the petition for want of jurisdiction.
Our jurisdiction to issue mandamus is limited by statute. See TEX. GOV’T CODE
ANN. § 22.221(a), (b). Generally, we may only issue writs of mandamus against a district
or county judge in our judicial district or when necessary to enforce our jurisdiction. Id.
Nothing in Relator’s petition suggests the issuance of the requested writ relates to our
jurisdiction over a pending cause.
While we judicially notice that the Honorable Ana E. Estevez presides over the
251st District Court of Potter and Randall Counties, Relator’s writ is not directed at her in
that capacity. Instead, his petition explicitly seeks relief against her actions taken in her
capacity as the Presiding Judge of the Ninth Administrative Judicial Region. It is clear
from Relator’s petition that he does not challenge her rulings in her capacity as a district
judge but, rather, as the presiding regional administrative judge for the Ninth
Administrative Region. We lack authority to issue a writ of mandamus against a judge
acting in that capacity. See In re Hettler, 110 S.W.3d 152, 154 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2003,
orig. proceeding); accord In re Cook, 394 S.W.3d 668, 671 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2012, orig.
proceeding) (concluding that the court “lack[ed] mandamus jurisdiction against a regional
presiding judge”).
Because we lack authority to grant the relief sought by Relator, we dismiss his
petition for writ of mandamus, expressing no opinion on the merits.
Judy C. Parker
Justice
Do not publish.
2