Ex Parte Jose Antonio Solis Ramirez v. the State of Texas ( 2023 )

Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-23-00219-CR
EX PARTE Jose Antonio SOLIS RAMIREZ
Original Proceeding 1
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
Beth Watkins, Justice
Delivered and Filed: May 3, 2023
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED
On March 9, 2023, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus. Relator also filed an
emergency motion to stay the underlying proceedings pending disposition of the petition for writ
of mandamus.
For mandamus relief in a criminal case, a relator has the burden to show the trial court
violated a ministerial duty and there is no adequate remedy at law. See State ex rel. Young v. Sixth
Jud. Dist. Ct. of Apps. at Texarkana, 236 S.W.3d 207, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (orig.
proceeding). A trial court has a ministerial duty to rule on a properly filed and timely presented
motion. See id. However, a relator has the burden of providing this court with a sufficient record.
See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a)(1). A relator must provide the court of appeals with a record showing
1
This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 13540CR, styled State of Texas v. Jose Antonio Solis Ramirez, pending in
the County Court, Kinney County, Texas, the Honorable Susan D. Reed presiding.
04-23-00219-CR
the motion at issue was properly filed, the trial court was made aware of the motion, and the motion
has not been ruled on by the trial court for an unreasonable time period. See In re Mendoza, 131
S.W.3d 167, 167–68 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2004, orig. proceeding); Barnes v. State, 832
S.W.2d 424, 426–27 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, orig. proceeding).
Here, the record contains a copy of relator’s application for writ of habeas corpus.
However, the copy of relator’s habeas application is not file-stamped, and this record does not
establish that the trial court was aware of relator’s filing or that the trial court has failed to rule for
an unreasonable period of time. See id. Based on the record before us, relator has not satisfied his
mandamus burden. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See TEX. R. APP. P.
52.8(a). Relator’s emergency motion to stay is denied as moot.
PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH
-2-