in Re: Joseph Gerald Van Orden

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: August 21, 2007
• Docket: 14-07-00588-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed August 21, 2007

Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed August 21, 2007.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-07-00588-CV

IN RE JOSEPH GERALD VAN ORDEN, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

WRIT OF MANDAMUS

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

On July 13, 2007, relator Joseph Gerald Van Orden filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this court,^[1] seeking (1) an order directing Mary Daigle, the Galveston County Clerk, to file relator=s pretrial writ of habeas corpus, and (2) to order the Galveston County court to take action on the habeas corpus request.  See Tex. Gov=t Code Ann. ' 22.221 (Vernon 2004); see  also  Tex. R. App. P. 52.1.

Mandamus relief may be granted if the relator shows that (1) the act sought to be compelled is purely ministerial, and (2) there is no adequate remedy at law.  Deleon v. Dist. Clerk, 187 S.W.3d 473, 474 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).  

In his pretrial habeas corpus writ, relator asserts that he has been denied a speedy trial on two misdemeanor charges filed against him in 2004.  Relator is currently incarcerated on a charge unrelated to the misdemeanor charges. 

To the extent relator requests a writ against the Galveston County Clerk, we do not have jurisdiction to issue a writ against the clerk under these circumstances.   See Tex. Gov=t Code Ann. ' 22.221 (Vernon 2004).  Regarding his request for a writ against the Galveston County Court, relator fails to establish that he is entitled to the requested relief.  See In re Villarreal, 96 S.W.3d 708, 710 (Tex. App.CAmarillo 2003, orig. proceeding) (stating petitioner=s evidence must show the court had a legal duty to perform a non‑discretionary act, was asked to perform the act, and failed or refused to do so).

 Accordingly, we deny relator=s petition for writ of mandamus.

PER CURIAM

Petition Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed August 21, 2007.

Panel consists of Justices Yates, Edelman, and Seymore.  

---

^[1]Relator also filed a (1) motion for leave to file an application for writ of mandamus, a motion that is no longer required under the Rules of Appellate Procedure; and (2) motion for suspension of the Rules of Appellate Procedure, specifically rule 9.3, which requires filing multiple copies.  See Tex. R. App. P. 9.3, 52 historical note (Vernon 2003).  In light of the disposition of relator=s petition, both motions are denied as moot.