In Re: Chi Yen Tran v. the State of Texas
This text of In Re: Chi Yen Tran v. the State of Texas (In Re: Chi Yen Tran 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
DENIED and Opinion Filed October 17, 2023
S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-23-00948-CV
IN RE CHI YEN TRAN, Relator
Original Proceeding from the 469th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 469-55653-2018
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Reichek, Smith, and Kennedy Opinion by Justice Reichek In her September 27, 2023 petition for writ of mandamus, relator seeks relief
from the trial court’s July 7, 2023 “Agreed Final Order.”
Relator’s petition does not comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate
Procedure. See, e.g., TEX. R. APP. P. 52.1, 52.3(j), 52.7(a). For instance, a petition
seeking mandamus relief must include a certification stating that the relator “has
reviewed the petition and concluded that every factual statement in the petition is
supported by competent evidence included in the appendix or record.” TEX. R. APP.
P. 52.3(j). Relator included such a statement but failed to sign it. The petition,
therefore, lacks an appropriate certification. Additionally, Rule 52.7(a)(1) requires the relator to file with her petition “a
certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to the relator’s claim for
relief that was filed in any underlying proceeding.” TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a)(1). Rule
52.7(a)(2) requires the relator to file a properly authenticated transcript of any
relevant testimony from any underlying proceeding, including any exhibits offered
in evidence, or a statement that no testimony was adduced in connection with the
matter complained. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a)(2). The documents contained in relator’s
record are not all certified or sworn copies. And relator failed to include either a
transcript or statement in accordance with rule 52.7(a)(2).
Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus.
/Amanda L. Reichek/ AMANDA L. REICHEK 230948F.P05 JUSTICE
–2–
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In Re: Chi Yen Tran v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-chi-yen-tran-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2023.