Ex Parte Jesus Manuel Campos Cisneros v. the State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJuly 12, 2023
Docket04-23-00220-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Ex Parte Jesus Manuel Campos Cisneros v. the State of Texas (Ex Parte Jesus Manuel Campos Cisneros v. the State of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ex Parte Jesus Manuel Campos Cisneros v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-23-00220-CR

EX PARTE Jesus Manuel CAMPOS CISNEROS

Original Proceeding 1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice Irene Rios, Justice Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

Delivered and Filed: July 12, 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 proceeding 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. 13542CR, styled State of Texas v. Jesus Manuel Campos Cisneros, pending in the County Court, Kinney County, Texas, the Honorable Susan D. Reed presiding. 04-23-00220-CR

the motion at issue was properly filed, the trial court was made aware of the motion, and the trial

court has refused to rule on the motion or has not ruled on the motion 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.

DO NOT PUBLISH

-2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In Re Mendoza
131 S.W.3d 167 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2004)
Barnes v. State
832 S.W.2d 424 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1992)
State ex rel. Young v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Appeals at Texarkana
236 S.W.3d 207 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Ex Parte Jesus Manuel Campos Cisneros v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-jesus-manuel-campos-cisneros-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2023.