In Re Gary Holland v. the State of Texas

• Court: Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)
• Decided: February 11, 2026
• Docket: 09-26-00037-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-26-00037-CR __________________

IN RE GARY HOLLAND

__________________________________________________________________

Original Proceeding County Court at Law No. 5 of Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause Nos. 25-397809 and 25-397810 __________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Gary Holland (Holland) filed a petition for a writ of mandamus or a writ of

prohibition, and he also filed a supplement to his petition. Holland claims the

presiding judge in his criminal cases “continues to act in the matter” after the judge

has been “recused by law.” He asks this Court to compel the trial court to

immediately halt all proceedings in Trial Court Case Numbers 25-397809 and 25-

397810 and dismiss both cases.

To obtain mandamus relief in a criminal case, the relator must show that he

has no adequate remedy at law and what he seeks to compel is ministerial, involving

no discretion. In re State ex rel. Best, 616 S.W.3d 594, 599 (Tex. Crim. App. 2021)

1 (orig. proceeding). We have reviewed the original and supplemented petition

seeking a writ of mandamus or a writ of prohibition, and we conclude Holland has

failed to show that he is entitled to the relief he seeks. Accordingly, we deny relator’s

petition. See id. 52.8(a); Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221.

PETITION DENIED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on February 10, 2026 Opinion Delivered February 11, 2026 Do Not Publish

Before Golemon, C.J., Johnson and Chambers, JJ.