in Re Allan Hawley

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-19-00615-CV
In re Allan Hawley
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM BURNET COUNTY
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator Allan Hawley has filed, pro se, a document with this Court entitled
Emergency Habeas Corpus Petition, which, based on the relief requested, we have construed as
a petition for writ of mandamus.1 See Surgitek, Bristol–Myers Corp. v. Abel, 997 S.W.2d 598,
601 (Tex. 1999) (courts look to substance of pleading rather than its caption or form to determine
its nature); see also Tex. Gov’t Code § 22.221; Tex. R. App. P. 52.1.
This Court does not have mandamus jurisdiction over the Burnet County Jail or
personnel thereof. By statute, this Court has the authority to issue a writ of mandamus against “a
judge of a district, statutory county, statutory probate county, or county court in the court of
appeals district” and other writs as necessary to enforce our appellate jurisdiction. See Tex.
Gov’t Code § 22.221. Employees of the Burnet County Jail are not parties against whom we
1
In the petition, Hawley indicates that he has been placed on suicide watch in the Burnet
County jail and seeks “removal from these unwarranted restrictive conditions.”
have the power to issue a writ of mandamus. Nor has Hawley demonstrated that the exercise of
our writ power is necessary to enforce our jurisdiction.
This Court is without jurisdiction to grant Hawley the relief he seeks in his
petition. Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App.
P. 52.8(a).
__________________________________________
Edward Smith, Justice
Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Triana and Smith
Filed: October 22, 2019
2