in Re: Donald Wayne Thieleman

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMarch 25, 2008
Docket13-08-00118-CR
StatusPublished

This text of in Re: Donald Wayne Thieleman (in Re: Donald Wayne Thieleman) 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: Donald Wayne Thieleman, (Tex. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

NUMBER 13-08-118-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG _______________________________________________________

IN RE: DONALD WAYNE THIELEMAN _______________________________________________________

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus _______________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Yañez, Rodriguez, and Vela Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion1

Relator, Donald Wayne Thieleman, filed a petition for writ of mandamus in the

above cause on January 18, 2008. However, the party filing a petition for a writ of

mandamus bears the burden of providing the court with a sufficient record to establish the

petitioner's right to mandamus relief. TEX . R. APP. P. 52.7. The rules that govern our

review of relator's petition require, for example, that the petition be accompanied by a

certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to the relator's claim for relief and

that was filed in any underlying proceeding. See id. at rule 52.7(a)(1); see also id. at rule

1 See T EX . R . A PP . P . 5 2 .8 (d ) ("W hen denying relief, the court m ay hand dow n an opinio n but is not required to do so."); T EX . R . A PP . P . 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and m em orandum opinions). 52.3(j) (required contents of appendix to petition include certified or sworn copy of "any

order complained of"). Relator has not submitted an appendix or any other material

constituting a record to support his petition. He, therefore, cannot demonstrate that the

trial court has abused its discretion or violated a duty imposed by law.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus,

is of the opinion that relator has not shown himself entitled to the relief sought.

Accordingly, relator's petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See id. at rule 52.8(a).

PER CURIAM

Do not publish. T EX . R. A PP. P. 47.2(b).

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed this 25th day of March, 2008.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
in Re: Donald Wayne Thieleman, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-donald-wayne-thieleman-texapp-2008.