in Re David Lorenza Joyner

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: November 22, 2006
• Docket: 01-06-01033-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion issued November 22, 2006

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

---

NO. 01-06-01033-CV

---

IN RE DAVID LORENZA JOYNER, Relator

---

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

---

MEMORANDUM OPINION

           Relator, David Lorenza Joyner, contends in a petition for writ of mandamus that respondent, Sara Ochoa, a deputy clerk with the Brazoria County’s district clerk’s office returned his suit papers in an action that he seeks to prosecute in Brazoria County district court. In his petition for writ of mandamus, relator requests this Court to direct respondent to “present” the suit to the district court, to assign his suit a cause number, and to issue citation.

          This Court has no jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against a district clerk unless necessary to enforce our appellate jurisdiction. In re Washington, 7 S.W.3d 181, 182 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1999) (orig. proceeding); see Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221(a) (Vernon 2004). Relator asserts that we have jurisdiction in this original proceeding because respondent’s refusal to perform the acts identified above interferes with this Court’s appellate jurisdiction over the lawsuit that he seeks to prosecute. We disagree.

          The filing of a notice of appeal invokes this Court’s appellate jurisdiction. See Washington, 7 S.W.3d at 182 (citing Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996), Rhem v. State, 820 S.W.2d 946, 947 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1991) (published order)). Our jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus exists to enforce our actual as opposed to our potential jurisdiction. See In re Johnson, No. 07-04-0048-CV, 2004 WL 384458, at *1 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Mar. 2, 2004) (orig. proceeding). Though we may have potential jurisdiction over it, we do not have actual appellate jurisdiction over the relator’s suit at this time. Thus, we have no jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against respondent. See Johnson, 2004 WL 384458, at *1.

          We dismiss relator’s petition for writ of mandamus for want of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Nuchia, Jennings, and Higley.