in Re George Valentino Brent

Opinion

Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed January 5, 2012.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-11-01114-CR

____________

IN RE GEORGE VALENTINO BRENT, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

WRIT OF MANDAMUS County Court at Law No. 1 Fort Bend County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 140573

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On December 30, 2011, relator filed a pro se Emergency Motion for Temporary Relief in this court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (Vernon 2004); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. Relator requests this Court to stay any action pending a decision on his application for writ of habeas corpus filed in the trial court.

Relator was convicted of misdemeanor assault-family violence and sentenced to sixty days in county jail, probated. Relator appealed and this court affirmed the trial court's judgment. Relator filed a petition for discretionary review that was refused by the

Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and on November 1, 2011, our mandate issued. Relator seeks a stay “on any actions imposed by mandate.”

Relator asserts that he has filed an application for writ of habeas corpus in the trial court and seeks a stay until the trial court rules on his application. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.072. To be entitled to mandamus relief in a criminal case, a relator must show that he has no adequate remedy at law to redress his alleged harm, and that what he seeks to compel is a ministerial act, not involving a discretionary or judicial decision. State ex rel. Young v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Court of Appeals at Texarkana, 236 S.W.3d 207, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (orig. proceeding). Relator has not shown the remedy at law provided by article 11.072 is inadequate to redress his alleged harm.

Relator has not established that he is entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Brown, Boyce, and McCally. Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).