In Re Danny C. Allen v. the State of Texas
This text of In Re Danny C. Allen v. the State of Texas (In Re Danny C. Allen 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
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-24-00789-CR
IN RE Danny C. ALLEN, Relator
Original Proceeding 1
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Irene Rios, Justice Beth Watkins, Justice Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice
Delivered and Filed: December 23, 2024
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED
On November 21, 2024, relator, Danny C. Allen, filed a petition for writ of mandamus and
a document titled “Challenge for Cause Burden of Proof Insufficient of Evidence Misconduct,”
which contained a section titled “Challenge Unfair & Prejudicial Ineffective of Counsel Trial
Proceedings Misconduct.” On November 22, 2024, Allen also filed a document titled “Challenge
Burden of Proof the Fifth Amendment Double Jeopardy Clause 357 Magnum.” These filings relate
to trial court cause number 2019CR6311. We previously affirmed a judgment of conviction
entered against Allen in that cause number. See Allen v. State, No. 04-23-00133-CR, 2024 WL
3056657, at *1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio June 20, 2024, pet. ref’d) (mem. op., not designated for
1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2019CR6311, styled State of Texas v. Danny Cejay Allen, in the 379th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Ron Rangel presiding. 04-24-00789-CR
publication). The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals refused Allen’s petition for discretionary
review from that direct appeal, and we issued our mandate on September 25, 2024.
After considering Allen’s petition for writ of mandamus, we conclude Allen is not entitled
to the relief sought. Accordingly, his petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See TEX. R. APP. P.
52.8(a).
With regard to the Challenges Allen filed, we interpret these filings to request habeas relief.
As an intermediate appellate court, we do not have original habeas corpus jurisdiction in criminal
matters. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 22.221(d) (specifying original jurisdiction of intermediate
courts of appeals or justices of such courts to issue writs of habeas corpus in civil cases); TEX.
CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.05 (limiting original jurisdiction to issue writs of habeas corpus in
criminal cases to Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, district courts, county courts, or judges of such
courts); see also In re Reece, 341 S.W.3d 360, 364 n.3 (Tex. 2011) (orig. proceeding); Ex parte
Braswell, 630 S.W.3d 600, 601–02 (Tex. App.—Waco 2021, orig. proceeding). We therefore take
no action on the Challenges Allen filed.
DO NOT PUBLISH
-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 Danny C. Allen v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-danny-c-allen-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2024.