in Re Willie L. Jackson Jr.

Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-18-00467-CR
IN RE Willie L. JACKSON Jr.
Original Mandamus Proceeding 1
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice
Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
Delivered and Filed: July 18, 2018
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED
Relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus complaining the trial court has refused to rule
on his motion to dismiss his court-appointed attorney.
To establish a right to mandamus relief in a criminal case, the relator must show 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). A trial court has a ministerial
duty to rule on a properly-filed and timely-presented motion. See In re State ex rel. Young v. Sixth
Judicial Dist. Court of Appeals, 236 S.W.3d 207, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (orig. proceeding).
However, a relator has the burden of providing this court with a record sufficient to
establish his right to mandamus relief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a)(1) (requiring relator to file “a
1
This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2017CR03621, styled The State of Texas v. Willie L. Jackson, Jr., pending
in the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Jefferson Moore presiding.
04-18-00467-CR
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”). In a case such as this one, a relator has the burden to
provide the court of appeals with a record showing the trial court was made aware of the motion
at issue and that such motion has not been ruled on by the trial court for an unreasonable period of
time. See In re Gallardo, 269 S.W.3d 643, 645 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2008, orig. proceeding).
Nothing is attached to relator’s petition. Because relator did not provide this court with a
record, he has failed to establish the motion at issue was filed with the trial court, the trial court
was made aware of the motion, or the trial court has expressly refused to rule on the motion.
Therefore, relator has not shown himself entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, the petition
for writ of mandamus is denied.
PER CURIAM
Do not publish
-2-