in Re Bennie Ray Johnson ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •                                       In The
    Court of Appeals
    Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
    __________________
    NO. 09-19-00249-CR
    __________________
    IN RE BENNIE RAY JOHNSON
    __________________________________________________________________
    Original Proceeding
    221st District Court of Montgomery County, Texas
    Trial Cause No. 19-07-09863-CR
    __________________________________________________________________
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    In an original petition for a writ of mandamus, Bennie Ray Johnson complains
    that he has been held in jail on a charge of burglary of a habitation following a
    probable cause hearing based upon the arresting officer’s police report and not upon
    a complaint signed by the victim of the burglary. Johnson failed to provide any
    supporting documentation with his mandamus petition. Additionally, “[i]t is well
    settled that an information may be predicated upon a complaint or affidavit made
    1
    upon information and belief.” Catchings v. State, 
    285 S.W.2d 233
    , 344 (Tex. Crim.
    App. 1955).
    Release from confinement in a criminal case is obtained through habeas
    corpus, over which this Court lacks original jurisdiction. See Tex. Code. Crim. Proc.
    Ann. arts. 11.01, 11.05 (West 2015). Furthermore, to the extent his petition seeks
    relief against the Montgomery County District Attorney’s Office and the
    Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, or the officials holding those offices, we lack
    mandamus jurisdiction. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (West Supp. 2018). To
    the extent that he seeks mandamus relief against the Judge of the 221st District Court
    of Montgomery County, Johnson has failed to show that he is entitled to the relief
    sought. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.7(a)(1) (relator must file with petition “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[]”). Accordingly, we deny the petition
    for a writ of mandamus. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).
    PETITION DENIED.
    PER CURIAM
    Submitted on August 20, 2019
    Opinion Delivered August 21, 2019
    Do Not Publish
    Before McKeithen, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 09-19-00249-CR

Filed Date: 8/21/2019

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 8/21/2019