in Re Andrew Pete

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: February 1, 2022
• Docket: 14-21-00582-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed February 1, 2022.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-21-00582-CR

IN RE ANDREW PETE, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS 179th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1724931

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On October 15, 2021, relator Andrew Pete filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221; see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. Relator’s case, which is pending in the 179th District Court has been assigned to a Harris Impact Felony Court. Relator objected to having visiting judge preside over his case and requested that the Honorable Ana Martinez, presiding judge of the 179th District Court of Harris County, decide all pre-trial motions and conduct all trial proceedings. In his mandamus petition, relator asks this court compel Judge Martinez to allow him to present his pending motions to Judge Martinez.

To be entitled to mandamus relief, a relator must show (1) that the relator has no adequate remedy at law for obtaining the relief the relator seeks; and (2) what the relator seeks to compel involves a ministerial act rather than a discretionary act. In re Powell, 516 S.W.3d 488, 494‒95 (Tex. Crim. App.) (orig. proceeding). Relator has an adequate remedy at law. See Mills v. Wilkinson, No. 01-96-00691-CV, 1996 WL 350358, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] June 17, 1996, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (not designated for publication) (holding relator had not shown that he lacked an adequate remedy by appeal with regard to objection of assignment of visiting judge).

Relator has not established that he is entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Wise, Bourliot, and Zimmerer. Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).