In Re Brandon Hjella v. the State of Texas
This text of In Re Brandon Hjella v. the State of Texas (In Re Brandon Hjella 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.
Opinion
IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-23-00193-CR
IN RE BRANDON HJELLA
Original Proceeding
From the Justice of the Peace, Pct 1, Place 2 McLennan County, Texas Trial Court No. J12T23-0237
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator Brandon Hjella has filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus in which
he requests that we order the Justice of the Peace, Precinct 1, Place 2, in McLennan County
to dismiss the underlying case against him.
Article V, section 6 of the Texas Constitution, which delineates the appellate
jurisdiction of the intermediate courts of appeals, provides that the courts of appeals have
original jurisdiction as prescribed by law. TEX. CONST. art. V, § 6. Section 22.221(a) of the
Government Code authorizes this Court to issue a writ of mandamus to enforce our
jurisdiction. TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 22.221(a). Section 22.221(b) of the Government Code authorizes this Court to issue a writ of mandamus against “a judge of a district,
statutory county, statutory probate county, or county court”; “a judge of a district court
who is acting as a magistrate at a court of inquiry under Chapter 52, Code of Criminal
Procedure”; or “an associate judge of a district or county court appointed by a judge
under Chapter 201, Family Code,” so long as those judges are in this Court’s district. Id.
§ 22.221(b).
We do not have jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against a justice of the
peace. Easton v. Franks, 842 S.W.2d 772, 773–74 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, orig.
proceeding) (per curiam); see also In re Wilkins, No. 11-20-00049-CR, 2020 WL 868062, at
*1 (Tex. App.—Eastland Feb. 21, 2020, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., per curiam, not
designated for publication). And Hjella’s petition does not demonstrate that the relief
that he requests is necessary to enforce our appellate jurisdiction.
Accordingly, we dismiss Hjella’s petition for writ of mandamus for want of
jurisdiction. Hjella’s “Emergency Motion to Advance Writ of Mandamus” is dismissed
as moot.
MATT JOHNSON Justice
Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Johnson, and Justice Smith Petition dismissed Opinion delivered and filed June 27, 2023 Do not publish [OT06]
In re Hjella Page 2
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In Re Brandon Hjella v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-brandon-hjella-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2023.