in Re Guadalupe Padilla
This text of in Re Guadalupe Padilla (in Re Guadalupe Padilla) 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.
Opinion
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-19-00100-CV
In re Guadalupe Padilla
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator Guadalupe Padilla filed a petition for writ of mandamus contending that
the trial court has not ruled on his motion for postconviction DNA testing and his motion for
appointment of counsel. Mandamus may issue to compel a trial court to rule on a motion, but the
relator must provide a mandamus record establishing that he requested a ruling on the pending
motion. See In re Sarkissian, 243 S.W.3d 860, 861 (Tex. App.—Waco 2008, orig. proceeding)
(noting that mandamus record failed to establish that relator requested ruling or otherwise called
motion to trial court’s attention and that “mere filing of a motion with a trial court clerk does not
equate to a request that the trial court rule on the motion”); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52.7(a) (relator
must file with petition “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”).
Accordingly, because Padilla failed to provide a sufficient mandamus record, his
petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a). __________________________________________ Gisela D. Triana, Justice
Before Justices Goodwin, Baker, and Triana
Filed: February 28, 2019
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
in Re Guadalupe Padilla, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-guadalupe-padilla-texapp-2019.