In Re Bryan Stallworth v. the State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedAugust 15, 2024
Docket10-24-00235-CR
StatusPublished

This text of In Re Bryan Stallworth v. the State of Texas (In Re Bryan Stallworth 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.

Bluebook
In Re Bryan Stallworth v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2024).

Opinion

IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-24-00235-CR

IN RE BRYAN STALLWORTH

Original Proceeding

From the 12th District Court Walker County, Texas Trial Court No. 30582

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On May 28, 2024, this Court issued a Second Abatement Order in cause number

10-23-00257-CR, in which we ordered the trial court clerk and court reporter to file

supplemental records. Bryan Stallworth, acting pro se, has now filed a petition for writ of

mandamus seeking to compel the trial court clerk and court reporter to file those

supplemental records in cause number 10-23-00257-CR.

First, we do not have jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against a district

clerk or court reporter unless necessary to enforce our jurisdiction. See TEX. GOV’T CODE

ANN. § 22.221(a), (b); In re Strickhausen, 994 S.W.2d 936, 936 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st

Dist.] 1999, orig. proceeding) (per curiam). Stallworth has not shown that a writ of mandamus directed to the district clerk or court reporter is necessary to enforce our

jurisdiction.

Second, on June 10, 2024, in cause number 10-23-00257-CR, the Court received the

supplemental clerk’s record ordered by the Second Abatement Order, and on June 28,

2024, in cause number 10-23-00257-CR, the Court received the supplemental reporter’s

record of the abatement hearing that was held on June 17, 2024, pursuant to the Second

Abatement Order. Stallworth’s petition for writ of mandamus is therefore moot, and

appellate courts are prohibited from deciding moot controversies. Nat’l Collegiate Athletic

Ass’n v. Jones, 1 S.W.3d 83, 86 (Tex. 1999); see Fouke v. State, 529 S.W.2d 772, 773 (Tex. Crim.

App. 1975) (dismissing appeal as moot because defendant voluntarily paid fine and costs

complained of in appeal).

For these reasons, Stallworth’s petition for writ of mandamus is dismissed for

want of jurisdiction.

MATT JOHNSON Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Johnson, and Justice Smith Petition dismissed Opinion delivered and filed August 15, 2024 Do not publish [OT06]

In re Stallworth Page 2

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Fouke v. State
529 S.W.2d 772 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1975)
National Collegiate Athletic Ass'n v. Jones
1 S.W.3d 83 (Texas Supreme Court, 1999)
In Re Strickhausen
994 S.W.2d 936 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
In Re Bryan Stallworth v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-bryan-stallworth-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2024.