In Re: Billy Wayne Horton v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: March 21, 2023
• Docket: 05-23-00223-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

DENIED and Opinion Filed March 21, 2023

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-23-00223-CV

IN RE BILLY WAYNE HORTON, Relator

Original Proceeding from the County Court at Law No. 2 Rockwall County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1-20-0837

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Molberg, Goldstein, and Breedlove Opinion by Justice Breedlove Before the Court is relator’s March 10, 2023 petition for writ of mandamus.

Relator bears the burden of providing the Court with a sufficient record to

show he is entitled to relief. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992)

(orig. proceeding). Relator’s petition is not properly certified. See TEX. R. APP. P.

52.3(j); In re Butler, 270 S.W.3d 757, 758 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, orig.

proceeding). Although relator has filed some unauthenticated documents, the

petition is not supported by an appendix with certified or sworn copies of documents

showing the matter complained, TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1)(A), and relator did not

file a record with his petition containing a certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to relator’s claim for relief and that was filed in the underlying

proceeding, TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a)(1); Butler, 270 S.W.3d at 759. Relator also

references a May 11, 2022 hearing, but relator did not provide a transcript of this

hearing or provide a statement that no testimony was adduced in connection with the

matter complained at that hearing. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a)(2). Without a certified

petition and authenticated record, relator has not carried his burden. See Butler, 270

S.W.3d at 758–59.

Relator’s petition also does not comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate

Procedure in numerous other respects. For example, relator’s petition is missing the

following: the identity of the parties and counsel, a table of contents, an index of

authorities, a concise description of the nature of any underlying proceeding, a

concise description of the respondent’s action from which the relator seeks relief, a

statement of jurisdiction, a statement of the issues presented, a statement of facts

supported by citations to competent evidence included in the appendix or record,

argument with appropriate citations to authorities and to the appendix or record, and

a prayer clearly stating the nature of the relief sought. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(a)–

(c), (d)(1), (d)(3), (e)–(i).

Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P.

52.8(a).

/Maricela Breedlove/ MARICELA BREEDLOVE JUSTICE

–2– 230223F.P05

–3–