in Re Joseph Gus Mays ( 2014 )


Menu:
  • Opinion filed November 20, 2014
    In The
    Eleventh Court of Appeals
    __________
    No. 11-14-00310-CR
    __________
    IN RE JOSEPH GUS MAYS
    Original Mandamus Proceeding
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Appearing pro se, Relator, Joseph Gus Mays, a prison inmate, has filed a
    petition for writ of mandamus. In his petition, Relator asks this court to direct
    Brown County to provide him with various transcripts and evidence so that he may
    pursue an appeal. Specifically, he seeks grand jury minutes, the affidavit for his
    arrest warrant, the police report, all evidence, all reports, witness statements, sworn
    affidavits, court transcripts, court notes, and any other evidence the State has
    against Relator regarding Cause No. CR20819. Based on his assertion that he
    requested these documents from the Judge of the 35th District Court of Brown
    County, the District Attorney’s Office for Brown County, and the court reporter of
    the 35th District Court, we assume that these are the parties from which he seeks
    mandamus relief. We dismiss Relator’s petition in part for want of jurisdiction and
    deny his petition in part.
    This court has jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against a “judge of a
    district or county court in the court of appeals district.” TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN.
    § 22.221(b)(1) (West 2004).       We do not have jurisdiction to issue a writ of
    mandamus against a district attorney’s office or a court reporter unless they are
    interfering with our appellate jurisdiction. See id. § 22.221(a), (b); Garner v.
    Gately, 
    909 S.W.2d 61
    , 62 (Tex. App.—Waco 1995, orig. proceeding) (holding no
    jurisdiction over district attorney); Lesikar v. Anthony, 
    750 S.W.2d 338
    , 339 (Tex.
    App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1988, orig. proceeding) (holding no jurisdiction over
    court reporter); Roberts v. Lowry, 
    742 S.W.2d 747
    , 748 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st
    Dist.] 1987, orig. proceeding) (holding no jurisdiction over district attorney).
    Relator has not filed a direct appeal in our court; thus, the district attorney’s office
    and the court reporter are not interfering with our jurisdiction by failing to supply
    Relator with the requested documents. Therefore, we do not have jurisdiction to
    issue a writ against either the District Attorney’s Office for Brown County or the
    court reporter for the 35th District Court. Accordingly, we dismiss Relator’s
    petition in part for want of jurisdiction.
    As to Relator’s claims against the trial court, we note that Relator has
    presented this court with two separate motions in which he sought certain
    documents. In his first motion, he sought grand jury minutes. The trial court
    denied his motion. In order for an accused to be entitled to the production of grand
    jury testimony, he must demonstrate a “particularized need” for such testimony to
    outweigh the traditional policy of grand jury secrecy. Garcia v. State, 
    454 S.W.2d 400
    , 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 1970). Relator has not done so here. Therefore, we
    cannot say that the trial court committed a clear abuse of discretion, as is required
    2
    for mandamus relief, when it denied Relator’s motion for grand jury minutes. See
    Walker v. Packer, 
    827 S.W.2d 833
    , 839 (Tex. 1992).
    In Relator’s second motion, he asks the court clerk to “please file this
    motion here in within your Court. Please bring this motion to the attention of the
    District Attorney Micheal Murray and advise him of the imperative need of all the
    documents to prepare an appeal.” Relator sought all documents pertaining to his
    case in Brown County, Cause No. CR20819, and his case in Eastland County,
    Cause No. 22990, in this motion. Even if we were to construe this document as a
    motion directed to the trial court, the document is not a certified or sworn copy of
    the motion as required under TEX. R. APP. P. 52. We also note that Relator has not
    provided us with an order from the trial court ruling on this motion. Therefore, we
    hold that Relator has not presented us with an adequate record to demonstrate that
    he is entitled to mandamus relief on this ground. See Walker, 827 S.W.2d at 837.
    We deny Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus against the trial court and
    dismiss for want of jurisdiction Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus against the
    District Attorney’s Office for Brown County and the court reporter for the 35th
    District Court.
    PER CURIAM
    November 20, 2014
    Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
    Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,
    Willson, J., and Bailey, J.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 11-14-00310-CR

Filed Date: 11/20/2014

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 11/20/2014