In Re Jhon Scott Smout, Relator v. the State of Texas

Opinion

In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07-26-00278-CR No. 07-26-00279-CR

IN RE JHON SCOTT SMOUT, RELATOR

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

May 22, 2026 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before PARKER, C.J., and DOSS and YARBROUGH, JJ.

Relator, John Scott Smout, has two criminal appeals presently pending before this

Court. 1 He has now filed two petitions for writ of mandamus requesting that this Court

compel his trial counsel and the State of Texas to produce all exculpatory evidence

related to those criminal proceedings. We dismiss his petition for want of jurisdiction.

We have authority to issue writs of mandamus against a judge of a district or county

court in our appeals district and all writs necessary to enforce our jurisdiction. See TEX.

GOV’T CODE ANN. §§ 22.221(a), (b). Smout does not request mandamus relief against a

district or county judge and has not demonstrated how issuance of the requested writ

1 Those appeals are docketed in cause numbers 07-26-00036-CR and 07-26-00037-CR. against his former counsel or the district attorney’s office is necessary to enforce our

jurisdiction. Consequently, we are without authority to issue said writ. See In re Oluma,

No. 14-25-00144-CR, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 1585, at *3 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.]

Mar. 11, 2025, no pet.) (per curiam) (mem. op.) (holding that an appellate court “lacks

authority to issue a writ of mandamus against a district attorney or assistant district

attorneys.”); In re Youngstrom, No. 07-14-00210-CV, 2014 Tex. App. LEXIS 6528, at *1–

2 (Tex. App.—Amarillo June 16, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op.) (dismissing petition for writ of

mandamus against former appellate counsel for want of jurisdiction).

Accordingly, Smout’s petitions for writ of mandamus are dismissed for want of

jurisdiction.

Per Curiam

Do not publish.