in Re Craig E. Mendenhall

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: September 27, 2012
• Docket: 10-12-00325-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-12-00325-CR

IN RE CRAIG E. MENDENHALL

Original Proceeding

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Craig E. Mendenhall requests that this Court issue a mandamus to compel the

Honorable Deborah Oakes Evans, Judge of the 87th District Court of Freestone County

to hold an evidentiary hearing on his article 11.25 writ application and follow the

directive of the Court of Criminal Appeals. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.25

(West 2005). There are procedural problems with Mendenhall’s petition, including but

not limited to, the petition was not served on Judge Evans. However, we use Rule 2

and look beyond the procedural problems to reach the merits of the petition. TEX. R.

APP. P. 2.

Mendenhall alleges that Judge Evans denied Mendenhall’s article 11.25 writ

application without an evidentiary hearing and in contravention of a directive by the Court of Criminal Appeals. Since the trial court ruled on Mendenhall’s petition, he

appears to have had an adequate remedy by appeal. See Ex parte Baltimore, 616 S.W.2d

205 (Tex. Crim. App. 1981) (appeal of denial of article 11.25 writ application); Ex parte

Malone, 2001 Tex. App. LEXIS 2459 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Apr. 12, 2001, no pet.) (appeal

of denial of article 11.25 writ application). When a relator has an adequate remedy by

appeal, mandamus relief is not available. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 840 (Tex.

1992).

Accordingly, Mendenhall’s petition for writ of mandamus is denied.

Mendenhall’s motion for leave to file one copy of his petition for writ of

mandamus and for other relief is dismissed as moot.

TOM GRAY Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Scoggins Petition denied Opinion delivered and filed September 27, 2012 Do not publish [OT06]

In re Mendenhall Page 2