in Re Jason Bernard Williams

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: December 10, 2014
• Docket: 09-14-00508-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________ NO. 09-14-00508-CR ____________________

IN RE JASON BERNARD WILLIAMS

_______________________________________________________ ______________

Original Proceeding ________________________________________________________ _____________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In a petition for writ of mandamus, Jason Bernard Williams contends the

Judge of the 1-A District Court of Newton County, Texas, violated a ministerial

duty to vacate a judgment that Williams contends is void. According to Williams,

following his plea bargain, he was convicted in 1993 of capital murder and

sentenced to life in prison. Williams argues his conviction is void because a jury

cannot be waived in a capital case. But see Act of May 27, 1991, 72nd Leg., R.S.,

Ch. 652, § 1, 1991 Tex. Gen. Laws 2394, 2394 (effective September 1, 1991)

(current version at Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 1.13 (West Supp. 2014))

(authorizing waiver of jury trial for an offense other than a capital felony case in

which the State seeks the death penalty). 1 Williams failed to furnish an appendix or record supporting his claim for

relief. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(k), 52.7. Because the trial court’s jurisdiction

expires when a case becomes final or is taken to a higher court, Williams cannot

demonstrate the trial court must act on his request to set aside the judgment. The

information in Williams’ petition for mandamus shows that the trial court’s

jurisdiction over his case expired long before September 30, 2014, the date

Williams claimed he filed a motion with the trial court seeking relief from his

conviction. See State v. Patrick, 86 S.W.3d 592, 596-97 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002).

To obtain relief in a writ of mandamus proceeding, a relator must establish

that the trial court failed to perform a ministerial duty, and that the relator has no

other adequate legal remedy. See State ex rel. Hill v. Court of Appeals for the Fifth

Dist., 34 S.W.3d 924, 927 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001). Because Williams has not

demonstrated that he is entitled to the relief sought in his petition, we deny his

petition for writ of mandamus.

PETITION DENIED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on December 9, 2014 Opinion Delivered December 10, 2014 Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.