eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 State Courts
 Court of Appeals of Texas
 2023-07

In Re Bryan Stallworth v. the State of Texas ( 2023 )


Menu:
 
  •                                     IN THE
TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-23-00213-CR
IN RE BRYAN STALLWORTH
Original Proceeding
From the 12th District Court
Walker County, Texas
Trial Court No. 30582
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this original proceeding, Relator Bryan Stallworth seeks mandamus relief in the
form of compelling the Respondent trial judge to hear and rule on several of his motions.
A court with mandamus authority “will grant mandamus relief if relator can
demonstrate that the act sought to be compelled is purely ‘ministerial’ and that relator
has no other adequate legal remedy.” In re Piper,
    105 S.W.3d 107
    , 109 (Tex. App.—Waco
2003, orig. proceeding) (quoting State ex rel. Rosenthal v. Poe,
    98 S.W.3d 194
    , 197–99 (Tex.
Crim. App. 2003) (orig. proceeding)). Consideration of a motion properly filed and before
the trial court is ministerial. State ex rel. Hill v. Court of Appeals for Fifth Dist.,
    34 S.W.3d 924
    , 927 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (orig. proceeding). A trial judge has a reasonable time to
perform the ministerial duty of considering and ruling on a motion properly filed and
before the judge. In re Chavez,
    62 S.W.3d 225
    , 228 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2001, orig.
proceeding). But that duty generally does not arise until the movant has brought the
motion to the trial judge’s attention, and mandamus will not lie unless the movant makes
such a showing, and the trial judge then fails or refuses to rule within a reasonable time.
In re Rangel,
    570 S.W.3d 968
    , 969 (Tex. App.—Waco 2019, orig. proceeding); see Chavez,
    62 S.W.3d at 228
    .
Stallworth bears the burden of providing this Court with a sufficient record to
establish his right to mandamus relief. See Rangel,
    570 S.W.3d at 969
    ; In re Blakeney,
    254 S.W.3d 659
    , 661 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2008, orig. proceeding). The record here does not
show that Stallworth has brought any of the motions in question to the attention of the
trial judge and that the trial judge has then failed or refused to rule within a reasonable
time. Accordingly, we deny Stallworth’s petition for writ of mandamus.
MATT JOHNSON
Justice
Before Chief Justice Gray,*
Justice Johnson, and
Justice Smith
*(Chief Justice Gray concurs in the judgment. A separate opinion will not issue.)
Petition denied
Opinion delivered and filed July 19, 2023
Do not publish
[OT06]
In re Stallworth                                                                     Page 2