in Re: Arlen Ray Tenberg

Opinion

NUMBER 13-09-00294-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

IN RE ARLEN RAY TENBERG

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Vela Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion1

Relator, Arlen Ray Tenberg, pro se, filed a petition for writ of mandamus in the above cause on June 1, 2009, contending that the trial court abused its discretion in denying relator’s motion for a nunc pro tunc judgment. Mandamus relief may be granted if the relator shows that: (1) the act sought to be compelled is purely ministerial; and (2) there is no adequate remedy at law. See Deleon v. Dist. Clerk, 187 S.W.3d 473, 474 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (orig. proceeding). The relator must have a “clear right” to the relief sought and the merits of the relief sought must be “beyond dispute.” See id. “The

1 See T EX . R. A PP . P. 52.8(d) (“W hen denying relief, the court m ay hand down an opinion but is not required to do so.”); T EX . R. A PP . P. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and m em orandum opinions).

requirement of a clear legal right necessitates that the law plainly describes the duty to be performed such that there is no room for the exercise of discretion.” See id.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus, is of the opinion that relator has not shown himself entitled to the relief sought. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED. See TEX . R. APP. P. 52.8(a).

PER CURIAM

Do not publish. See TEX . R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed this 3rd day of June, 2009.