In Re Kamilah Antoinette Johnson v. the State of Texas
This text of In Re Kamilah Antoinette Johnson v. the State of Texas (In Re Kamilah Antoinette Johnson v. the State of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Opinion issued June 2, 2026
In The
Court of Appeals For The
First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-26-00554-CR ——————————— IN RE KAMILAH ANTOINETTE JOHNSON, Relator
Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator, Kamilah Antoinette Johnson, proceeding pro se, filed a petition for a
writ of mandamus asserting that the trial court had “failed and refused to rule” on
two pro se motions she allegedly filed in the underlying criminal cause, including a
“Motion to Quash Arrest Warrant” filed on or around January 20, 2025, and a
“Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal and Subject Matter Jurisdiction” filed on or around March 5, 2025 and April 6, 2026.1 Relator’s mandamus petition argued
that the “trial court ha[d] a ministerial duty to rule on pending motions,” and that the
trial court’s failure to do so amounted to an abuse of discretion for which relator
lacked an adequate remedy. Relator’s petition requested that this Court grant her
petition for writ of mandamus and order and compel the trial court to “immediately”
rule on her pending motions, “[e]nter an order quashing the outstanding warrant” in
the underlying cause, and to “[i]mmediately expunge [r]elator[’]s record of all
fraudulent criminal infractions associated with this tax matter.”
Our review of relator’s mandamus petition reflects that she has failed to
establish that she is entitled to mandamus relief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(l),
52.7(a)(1); see also In re Powell, 516 S.W.3d 488, 494–95 (Tex. Crim. App. 2017);
In re Gomez, 602 S.W.3d 71, 73 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2020, orig.
proceeding). Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. See
TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a). We dismiss any pending motions as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Adams and Justices Guerra and Guiney.
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
1 The underlying case is The State of Texas v. Kamilah Antoinette Johnson, Cause Number 1855185, pending in the 496th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Dan Simons presiding.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In Re Kamilah Antoinette Johnson v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-kamilah-antoinette-johnson-v-the-state-of-texas-txctapp1-2026.