in Re Emmanuel Ololade

Opinion

Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed January 17, 2013.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-13-00001-CR

IN RE EMMANUEL OLOLADE, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS

262nd District Court Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 870,145

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On January 2, 2013, relator Emmanuel Ololade filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. §22.221; see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this court to compel the Honorable Olen Underwood, administrative judge of the Second Administrative Judicial Region to send documents relating to the assignment of the presiding judge to relator’s 2001 trial.

Consideration of a motion that is properly filed and before the court is a ministerial act. State ex rel. Curry v. Gray, 726 S.W.2d 125, 128 (Tex. Crim. App.1987) (orig. proceeding). A relator must establish the trial court (1) had a legal duty to rule on the motion; (2) was asked to rule on the motion; and (3) failed to do so. In re Keeter, 134 S.W.3d 250, 252 (Tex. App.—Waco 2003, orig. proceeding). A relator must show that the trial court received, was aware of, and was asked to rule on the motion. In re Villarreal, 96 S.W.3d 708, 710 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2003, orig. proceeding). In this proceeding, however, relator did not attach a file-stamped copy of his motion demonstrating it is actually pending before the respondent.

Relator has not established entitlement to the extraordinary relief of a writ of mandamus. Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Frost, Brown, and Busby. Do Not Publish — TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).