in Re Shane Matthew Buchel ( 2018 )


Menu:
  •                                  NUMBER 13-18-00512-CR
    COURT OF APPEALS
    THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
    CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
    IN RE SHANE MATTHEW BUCHEL
    On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Longoria and Hinojosa
    Memorandum Opinion by Justice Hinojosa 1
    Shane Matthew Buchel, proceeding pro se, filed a petition for writ of mandamus in
    the above cause 2 through which he contends that the trial court erred by failing to
    “consolidate restitution.”      Buchel argues that the trial court incorrectly allowed the
    collection of restitution for multiple cases according to each individual judgment and its
    corresponding order to withdraw funds from his inmate trust account cases, even though
    1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not
    required to do so.”); 
    id. R. 47.4
    (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions).
    2This original proceeding arises from trial court cause number 15-11-12,317 in the 24th District
    Court of DeWitt County, Texas. The respondent in this original proceeding is the Honorable Kemper
    Stephen Williams. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.2.
    the restitution was ordered in connection with concurrent sentences.         This Court
    requested and received a response to the petition for writ of mandamus from the State of
    Texas, acting by and through the District Attorney for DeWitt County, Texas. See TEX. R.
    APP. P. 52.8(a),(b).
    The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus,
    the response, and the applicable law, is of the opinion that the petition for writ of
    mandamus should be denied for the reasons expressed in our opinion in In re Shane
    Matthew Buchel, No. 13-18-00509-CR, 2018 WL ___, at *_ (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi
    Dec. 6, 2018, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication), available at
    http: //www.search.txcourts.gov/case.aspx?cn=13-18-00509-CR&coa=coa13.
    Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d). We
    likewise deny Buchel’s motion for nihil dicit judgment.
    LETICIA HINOJOSA
    Justice
    Do not publish.
    TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
    Delivered and filed the
    6th day of December, 2018.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-18-00512-CR

Filed Date: 12/6/2018

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 12/8/2018