In Re Brandon Espinoza v. the State of Texas

• Court: Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)
• Decided: March 4, 2026
• Docket: 04-26-00108-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-26-00108-CV

IN RE Brandon ESPINOZA

Original Proceeding 1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice H. Todd McCray, Justice

Delivered and Filed: March 4, 2026

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DISMISSED AS MOOT

Relator, Brandon Espinoza (“Espinoza”), filed his petition for writ of mandamus on

February 10, 2026. Espinoza sought an order compelling the respondent to rule on his first

amended motion to compel discovery. We issued an order requiring the real party in interest and

respondent to file their responses to the petition, if any, no later than February 23, 2026. Prior to

the response deadline, Espinoza filed a supplemental record that included an order on his first

amended motion to compel discovery signed February 18, 2026. The signed order was

accompanied by the trial court docket evidencing that the order had been entered in the underlying

matter.

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2024-CI-25957, styled Brandon Espinoza v. Alexis Chapa, pending in the 285th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Nadine Melissa Nieto presiding. 04-26-00108-CV

This Court cannot decide a case that has become moot. See Heckman v. Williamson Cnty.,

369 S.W.3d 137, 162 (Tex. 2012); see also In re Salverson, No. 01-12-00384-CV, 2013 WL

557264, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Feb. 14, 2013, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.). “A

proceeding becomes moot ‘if, since the time of filing, there has ceased to exist a justiciable

controversy between the parties—that is, if the issues presented are no longer ‘live,’ or if the parties

lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome.’” In re Baja Freight, Ltd., No. 04-23-01010-CV,

2023 WL 8609284, at *2 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Dec. 13, 2023, no pet.) (quoting Heckman v.

Williamson County, 369 S.W.3d 137, 162 (Tex. 2012)); see also In re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc.,

166 S.W.3d 732, 737 (Tex. 2005) (orig. proceeding) (“A case becomes moot if a controversy

ceases to exist between the parties at any stage of the legal proceedings ....”).

The trial court has provided Espinoza with the relief that he has requested from this court.

The controversy ceases to exist. This matter has become moot. The petition for writ of mandamus

is dismissed as moot.

-2-