In Re George Alvarez v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: June 24, 2024
• Docket: 13-24-00328-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

NUMBER 13-24-00328-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG

IN RE GEORGE ALVAREZ

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Tijerina and Peña Memorandum Opinion by Justice Peña1

Relator George Alvarez has filed a petition for writ of mandamus including a

request to stay the trial of this case which is scheduled to commence this morning.

In a criminal case, to be entitled to mandamus relief, the relator must establish

both that the act sought to be compelled is a ministerial act not involving a discretionary

or judicial decision and that there is no adequate remedy at law to redress the alleged

1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not

required to do so. When granting relief, the court must hand down an opinion as in any other case.”); id. R. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions). harm. See In re Meza, 611 S.W.3d 383, 388 (Tex. Crim. App. 2020) (orig. proceeding);

In re Harris, 491 S.W.3d 332, 334 (Tex. Crim. App. 2016) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam);

In re McCann, 422 S.W.3d 701, 704 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (orig. proceeding). If the

relator fails to meet both requirements, then the petition for writ of mandamus should be

denied. See State ex rel. Young v. Sixth Jud. Dist. Ct. of Apps. at Texarkana, 236 S.W.3d

207, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (orig. proceeding).

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

is of the opinion that relator has not met his burden to obtain mandamus relief.

Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus and the request to stay the trial of

this matter.

L. ARON PEÑA JR. Justice

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2 (b).

Delivered and filed on the 24th day of June, 2024.