in Re James Rubio

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

_________________

NO. 09-17-00343-CV

_________________

IN RE JAMES RUBIO

________________________________________________________________________

Original Proceeding

435th District Court of Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 11-04-04400-CV

________________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The trial court civilly committed James Rubio for sex offender treatment in 2011. See generally In re Commitment of Rubio, No. 09-11-00602-CV, 2013 WL 541896, at *1 (Tex. App.—Beaumont Feb. 14, 2013, pet. denied) (mem. op.). In 2016, Rubio filed a motion in arrest of judgment and a motion in which he challenged the trial court’s jurisdiction over the case. Rubio appears to argue that he is not a repeat sexually violent offender because one of his prior convictions arose from a proceeding in which he made a no contest plea. In a mandamus petition, Rubio seeks to compel the trial court to rule on his motions. See generally Safety–

2

Kleen Corp. v. Garcia, 945 S.W.2d 268, 269 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, orig. proceeding).

Rubio’s motions attack a final judgment that, notwithstanding his claim to the contrary, he failed to establish is void. See Cook v. Cameron, 733 S.W.2d 137, 140 (Tex. 1987). Rubio has not shown that the trial court has a ministerial duty to rule on the motions at this time. Accordingly, we deny the petition for a writ of mandamus.

PETITION DENIED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on September 27, 2017 Opinion Delivered September 28, 2017

Before Kreger, Horton, and Johnson, JJ.